Home Politics & Debate
Ongoing maintenance - the boards are undergoing some ongoing, intermittent maintenance. Pages might load slightly slower than usual and there may be very short periods where the boards are offline.

Feminism has held back working class men

13»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh for crying out loud, why does every single mention of the word "feminism" lead to moany little boys wanking on about how "oh noes teh boys have it bad too!!1!2"?

    The simple facts are that women are less likely to be senior managers in FTSE250 companies, they're less likely to be politicians and senior leaders and, if they do reach the top, they're likely to be paid less and worked harder than their equivalent male colleagues. Women are more likely to be in minimum wage jobs, they're more likely to experience domestic violence and they're more likely to experience sexual violence. The UK has had one female PM in its entire history, and hasn't had a female PM for over 20 years. If William was a female it would be Harry who was next in line to throne. And people try and claim there's no patriarchy anymore?

    It doesn't matter how many times idiots try and claim it, women and men do NOT have equality of opportunity. It is better than it has been, in some areas, but no better in other ways. In some ways it's become worse: not only do you have the slut/frigid dichotomy, you now have an additional expectation that if you don't dress like a hooker you're somehow inferior. Female success has become far more about aesthetic appeal in recent years.

    There are many reasons why girls are achieving better exam results than boys and I don't think that the education system is skewed against boys. It comes down to who is more prepared to work hard and, IME, the reason why boys don't try at school is because trying hard at school is seen as 'unmasculine' and bullying results from it. Girls do the studying and boys play football and fight. It isn't the 'feminists' creating this cultural expectation, it's men. You don't get academic achievement without trying bloody hard and the issue that too many boys simply don't try and don't engage. It isn't necssarily their fault, there are a lot of socio-economic factors behind why this happens, but it sure as hell isn't because the 'feminists' go on a Reclaim the Streets march.

    Jaloux, raise your son to be hard-working and see the value of study and he will succeed. There's nothing more needed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What he said.

    Boys can do just fine at school, if they have an attitude that values academic achievement and are keen to learn, and don't get brainwashed into the 'studying is girly' school of thought.

    If men and women had equal opportunity then they'd be on a level playing field, and that's definitely not the case. Much of it isn't possible to change over night, as time is needed for generations to work their way through. 30 years ago the % of women in higher education was much lower than it is today, which will by it's nature somewhat limit the distribution of women in roles held by those with 30 years worth of careers. That said, starting with getting it right at entry level would be a good start, and then following it through as time passes.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What Arctic said with an added analysis of his comment:

    If boys struggle academically and, as a generalism, get worse results (for which there is loads of evidence internationally).... why is it that they succeed in careers over their academically superior sisters (for which there is loads of evidence internationally)?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do boys actually struggle academically? Or do they fail to perform because they can't be arsed?

    In which case, they then perform in the work place because there's a nice mercenary motivator.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh for crying out loum" lead to moany little boys wanking on about howd, why does every single mention of the word "feminis "oh noes teh boys have it bad too!!1!2"?
    Oh, it's you again? For your notice, I have reported your post. This is not a way to answer, and it is not a method to respond to people disagreeing with you.

    By the way, it's nothing about moaning about who's living under the worst condition. My point exactly, is that BOTH men and women have challenges that feminism not necessarily takes into account. You prove my point exactly, that when challenging the "feministic" hegemony by stating that not only women (which is not the same as not acknowledgning womens problems as well) have problems.
    The simple facts are that women are less likely to be senior managers in FTSE250 companies, they're less likely to be politicians and senior leaders and, if they do reach the top, they're likely to be paid less and worked harder than their equivalent male colleagues. Women are more likely to be in minimum wage jobs, they're more likely to experience domestic violence and they're more likely to experience sexual violence. The UK has had one female PM in its entire history, and hasn't had a female PM for over 20 years. If William was a female it would be Harry who was next in line to throne. And people try and claim there's no patriarchy anymore?

    It doesn't matter how many times idiots try and claim it, women and men do NOT have equality of opportunity. It is better than it has been, in some areas, but no better in other ways. In some ways it's become worse: not only do you have the slut/frigid dichotomy, you now have an additional expectation that if you don't dress like a hooker you're somehow inferior. Female success has become far more about aesthetic appeal in recent years.

    There are many reasons why girls are achieving better exam results than boys and I don't think that the education system is skewed against boys. It comes down to who is more prepared to work hard and, IME, the reason why boys don't try at school is because trying hard at school is seen as 'unmasculine' and bullying results from it. Girls do the studying and boys play football and fight. It isn't the 'feminists' creating this cultural expectation, it's men. You don't get academic achievement without trying bloody hard and the issue that too many boys simply don't try and don't engage. It isn't necssarily their fault, there are a lot of socio-economic factors behind why this happens, but it sure as hell isn't because the 'feminists' go on a Reclaim the Streets march.

    Jaloux, raise your son to be hard-working and see the value of study and he will succeed. There's nothing more needed.

    It's a complex picture, and boys not working hard enough is of course part of it, but I refuse to accept that it is the entire reason. More research should be done on the topic while trying to stimulate boys to work harder in school.

    However, I do think some part of the problem is also that subjects where boys excelled has been less and less emphasized. For example, at our schools, handcrafting used to be important and also contributed to your gpa, but this is not true any longer.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What Arctic said with an added analysis of his comment:

    If boys struggle academically and, as a generalism, get worse results (for which there is loads of evidence internationally).... why is it that they succeed in careers over their academically superior sisters (for which there is loads of evidence internationally)?

    There may be many reasons for this, but the most important one is that every career type is not based on perforiming well academically. Sales jobs for example, rely heavily on personality and attitutde rather than acaemic performance, so if you're good it's possible to get a top job without doing well at school as long as you work hard for it.

    Also, these types of sales jobs also attract the "male instinct", by being competitive. Of course women also apply for these types of jobs, but in many sales jobs, there is a higher representation of men, and I believe that they are driven by the competition.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What he said.

    Boys can do just fine at school, if they have an attitude that values academic achievement and are keen to learn, and don't get brainwashed into the 'studying is girly' school of thought.
    Yes, many boys could probably work harder, but don't you think we owe boys to investigate the reason and to put countermeasures into motion if there are systematic reasons for why boys perform worse?

    The same consideration was initially given to women when they were having worse results in school, so there's no reason to not give boys the same opportunity. Although there still are fields in which academic training is less important, more and more workplaces requires an academic degree. We need to be sure that both men and women are given the best possible environment for performing optimally.

    What I'm saying is that it's dangerous to assume that boys are just "lazier" without investigating causes.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's not dangerous to assume that under performing boys are lazy at scool, that's pretty much a given fact. What would be foolish is to ignore the fact and not look at ways to try and change that case. Performance in the work place shows that it's not lack of ability that's the problem, it's lack of application. A much harder issue to address but one that is definitely being looked into. Interestingly single sex education can often help.

    I don't see anything wrong with Kermits post at all. If you think that there's a genuine problem then fine, report it, but publically posting 'I've reported you' makes you sound like a whiney small child in the playground 'I'm telling on you'.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh for crying out loud, why does every single mention of the word "feminism" lead to moany little boys wanking on about how "oh noes teh boys have it bad too!!1!2"?

    Just wanted to pop in to say that this kind of intro to your argument is only going to provoke a response to the unnecessary insult rather than a response to the debate. It's great to have a lively disagreement but let's keep it respectful eh :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    OK.

    Why does every mention of feminism lead to narrow minded men whinging that men have problems in life too?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's not dangerous to assume that under performing boys are lazy at scool, that's pretty much a given fact.
    Is it. Why? Are you sure, and shouldn't we allow for a closer look by professionals? Are we sure that all boys are lazy and that you can attribute everyones result to laziness alone?
    What would be foolish is to ignore the fact and not look at ways to try and change that case. Performance in the work place shows that it's not lack of ability that's the problem, it's lack of application. A much harder issue to address but one that is definitely being looked into. Interestingly single sex education can often help.
    I agree to that, single sex education HAS indeed helped and some scientists belive some of the reason is that the boys stays more concenctrated and there are less interruptions in class.
    I don't see anything wrong with Kermits post at all. If you think that there's a genuine problem then fine, report it, but publically posting 'I've reported you' makes you sound like a whiney small child in the playground 'I'm telling on you'.

    Well, I don't like reporting people behind their backs. He clearly posted something that was not respectful and did not contributing to the debate, and then I'll tell people. In here as much as in other forums and real life.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    OK.

    Why does every mention of feminism lead to narrow minded men whinging that men have problems in life too?

    I have a problem with these types of personal assaults, can we have a mature conversation in here.

    Those "whinging" men may actually be feminist men that realise that men are part of the equation for gender equality. All I'm saying is that we owe every pupil - including boys to be sure that we're providing the best learning environment possible. With todays knowledge society I don't think we should settle for less.
  • **helen****helen** Mod malarkist Posts: 9,235 Listening Ear
    OK.

    Why does every mention of feminism lead to narrow minded men whinging that men have problems in life too?

    Really not in the spirit of fair debate Scary, take a step back and stick the the points of the arguments rather than getting personal.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's not dangerous to assume that under performing boys are lazy at scool, that's pretty much a given fact.

    It's not dangerous, no. But it does rather smack of an overly-simplified view on things. I'd imagine there are a myriad of reasons why, generally speaking, boys seem to be outperformed by girls academically. If T-Kay was to suggest that inequalities in women's pay and position were down to them being "lazy", your piss'd boil.
    What would be foolish is to ignore the fact and not look at ways to try and change that case. Performance in the work place shows that it's not lack of ability that's the problem, it's lack of application. A much harder issue to address but one that is definitely being looked into. Interestingly single sex education can often help.

    You're haemorrhaging non sequiturs here. Discrepancy between performance in the workplace and performance at school could be indicative of a whole host of issues: the two are hardly like-for-like comparisons. You seem to be implying that if someoen can take an engine apart and rebuild it, then why can't they critique Shakespeare?
    I don't see anything wrong with Kermits post at all. If you think that there's a genuine problem then fine, report it, but publically posting 'I've reported you' makes you sound like a whiney small child in the playground 'I'm telling on you'.

    AR's posts are generally thought provoking as long as you mentally trim out the vitriol and hair pulling. And to be fair I don't think T-Kay has adopted that tone with either you or AR.

    It's an interesting debate, and one i've enjoyed reading up until this point. However, it does seem like it's starting to take a nose-dive.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jaloux, raise your son to be hard-working and see the value of study and he will succeed. There's nothing more needed.

    I fear he won't get away with anything else ;)

    However, I don't think it's quite that simple. I find it hard to believe that already in their first grades boys are generally unhappier just because they are lazier. Although I believe a lot of the motivation to apply themselves does depend on their social background and role models.

    On a slightly different note, I've gotten a very good insight into the power of peer pressure these past few months and quite frankly, it scares me to see how much pressure there is on young children to behave in accordance to pre-determined gender roles. That's an area where (so far) I feel "safer" to have a boy rather than a girl. I have a stepdaughter just starting school and it's ridiculous to see her and her female classmates dressed in "cute" pink dresses and bare legged for school when it's snowing outside. To hear a six year old claim she can't eat too much or she'll get fat. All the endless restrictions and pressure to act in a certain way has already started long before school starts. It tells me how incredibly important it is to help girls be self confident and independent for future years. It tells me how much they need a healthy family life to know there's an alternative.

    I don't remember this from my own youth and especially not all the girl-specific and boy-specific marketing. Daily, I see endless pink replicas of young girls dressed in hello kitty or disney-princess merchandise. In many ways I sometimes think there's a possibility that we're taking a step backwards when it comes to equality. I fear what many of these girls will grow up to be like when their existance is about conforming to physical ideals almost right from birth. No wonder women are reluctant to demand a raise, promotion or whatever it be that they want when we're trained to be self conscious and that we ought to look our best all the time. Who cares if a woman gets a promotion if she never wears make-up for work?? That's not feminine at all....

    I think it's a real shame that the word feminism has been ruined and many people just see red when the word pops up. I also think it's a real shame how many debates about obstacles of one sex always have to turn into arguments that one sex surely must have it a lot worse than the other. Eventually this is an issue that affects most people one way or the other, people have spouses, relatives or children of both sexes.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I really don't see why its so shocking to suggest that men face problems and in some ways men do have it worse off than women. If anything the idea when women moan about women having a bad time is fine but that when men do the same thing its case of them being weak then it just reinforces outdated gender stereotypes.

    As for the education system. If a disproportiante number of boys are failing compared to girls then its something that needs to be looked at. From talking to relatives it seems that in some primary schools really young kids, 4 or 5 get stuck with a really formal way of learning, sitting at desks all day. Not all kids that young are ready for it and I imagine a bigger proportion of children not ready for formal learning age 5 are going to be boys. If you are already turned off learning at the age of 5 then what hope is there when you get to secondary school?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Feminism may have had some negative knock on effect on working class men, but I find this reinforces rather than challanges the idea that contemporary society is patriarchal- highlighting where working class men are oppressed by the patriarchal order too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JanePerson wrote: »
    I really don't see why its so shocking to suggest that men face problems and in some ways men do have it worse off than women. If anything the idea when women moan about women having a bad time is fine but that when men do the same thing its case of them being weak then it just reinforces outdated gender stereotypes.

    The reason why it irritates the hell out of me is because it is a tactic frequently used by misogynists to divert a discussion or debate away from the real issues. Usually it's a tactic that crops up whenever sexual violence, domestic violence or pay and employment inequality is raised.

    It annoys me because it misses the point. Men generally are more likely to be in employment, they're less likely to be paid national minimum wage and they are likely to have better salaries, better bonuses and better perks than women in equivalent (or often even exactly the same) employment.

    This isn't to say that men don't face difficulties in life, or that these difficulties make them weak. It's to point out that, by and large, women face more problems more often.

    Bringing up the argument that "men have it bad too" is used as a tactic to belittle the problems of gender inequality that, almost invariably, stack the odds against women and in favour of men. Even the only major area where women have an advantage- custodial battles- occurs because of an outdated and stereotypical view that a woman would always be a better carer and parent than a man.
    As for the education system. If a disproportiante number of boys are failing compared to girls then its something that needs to be looked at

    2010's GCSE results show that 72% of girls get at least one A*-C and 66% of boys get at least one A*-C. The average pass rate is 69% of candidates getting at least one A*-C.

    Girls are outperforming boys, but not massively so, there's only a couple of percentage point in it. It's certainly not outside the realms of statistical chance and there's little to indicate that the examination system is systematically skewed in favour of girls. There are all sorts of pet theories about coursework favouring girls and final examinations favouring boys, but even when I sat my A'Levels 10 years ago (before modular and coursework examination) girls generally slightly outperformed boys.

    I think some of it will be application. Why this is is complicated, I don't think it is laziness, but there are societal pressures on boys not to be the geek. Anecdote is not the singular of data, but IME when I was studying in the library on a Saturday morning for my A'Levels I never saw other boys studying, but saw plenty of girls in there studying. And I think that's why I achieved at A'Level and other boys in the class, who were as clever as me, did not. However, on the flip side, my wife didn't apply herself either and got poor marks, when she is more intelligent than I, so go figure.

    IMHO the ability to learn at school has far more to do with socio-economic background than it does about gender. I'd agree that kids who are behind at five will be behind for their entire life, but that's far more about how their parents have brought them up in early childhood than what gender they are. I'd also agree that five is often too young for full time schooling, but I don't think girls are noticeably more mature at five than boys are. It's not a gender thing, again.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well given that this is a debate about men being held back I don't see why is inappropriate to bring up the point that men face difficulties as well as women.

    As for education. I don't think the problem with formal sit down learning at age five is because of girls maturing faster but more to do with the differences between boys and girls. To be honest I think 4-5 is too early for both genders to be in that type of formal education.

    However from my expedience of other peoples kids and toddlers its much harder to get a little boy to sit down and be quiet than a girl. Boys want to run around and even when they get older I think a more practical way of learning works better for them than long hours of sit down learning.

    I don't think GCSEs themselves favour girls but I think the education system as a whole engages girls better. The fact that there are more females than males at a lot of universities speaks volumes about how engaged boys are in education.

    I suppose this is the first time where a gender gap with exam results is causing problems. In the past when it was the other way round the low achieving girls had housework and childbearing to fall back on. Now with their being less industry the low achieving boys don't have anything to fall back on so its no wonder people are looking for things to blame.
Sign In or Register to comment.