Real World Event Discussions

Gender Equality Greatest in Scandinavian Countries

POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Saturday, October 23, 2010 17:19
VIEWED: 2497
PAGE 2 of 2

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Klesst:
The average Scandinavian woman is stronger, smarter and better looking than the average American woman, it's no surprise that they would perform better in the workplace. Pirate Cat has it right, women that perform equally well in the work place earn the respect they deserve and those put in a position just because they are women are treated the same as any incompetent guy would be in the same circumstances, they just make a bigger fuss about it.



Or it could be that, as a nation, they have more respect for women than is being indicated on this thread.

And it's not about performing better either, it's about opportunity.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 3:45 PM

Curiously, the nations with the most respect for women are also the most successful economically. Your paradigm is broken, Cat.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 3:57 PM

Why even bother? No man's mind will be changed by the facts; just as Cat, they decide what's "true" according to their own experiences/biases, and that's that.

I've had women and men for supervisors and bosses. The women LISTENED to me and worked with me to solve problems. The men just wanted to keep the status quo and not deal with the situation. So I could easily use my experiences as the be-all, end-all of the "truth", but it would be equally irrelevant.

The fact is that women have had to fight tooth and nail to get even close to equality with men; if they act the same way as men, they're called bitches, drama queens or "on the rag", whereas the exact same actions from a male are respected, a lot of the time. Not always, there is no "always", it's individual situations. But overall, the FACTS show that women have a long ways to go yet to reach parity with men in the work place. The vast majority in our country of everything, from government to politics to corporations, are still a "good old boy" network, and it'll be a long time before tha changes.

It's not because of the women. Much as some would like to make it that. Those are the same excuses people give for minorities not having parity, be they male or female. Just excuses.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 4:02 PM

Girls are icky and have cooties.



Those arn't boobs, they're lies! - Stewie Griffin

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 4:43 PM

It seems to me that Cat has a paradigm which says that only the "male style" of work leads to economic success. That style is: intense focus on the goal, stable hierarchies, sacrifice, and inattention to feelings.

I don't think it's an excuse, I think it's an opinion borne of personal experience. Some men respond better to that kind of work milieu. It helps reduce testosterone- fueled jockeying for position. It's also possible that he's had experience with one or two women (possibly even his mom) who played head-games. There may also be a cultural component: Cat may be from a traditional patriarchal culture. Personality plays a role. Finally, level of education makes a difference: PhDs are EXPECTED to act independently and to manage departmental politics, which means acting independently as if equal in an actual hierarchy.

Since I supervise a mixed professional group (four women, nine men) I've found that four of the men and two woman (1st/2nd generation patriarchal cultures) prefer clear lines of authority and straightforward directives, the remainder (American culture or 1st/ 2nd PhD) work best with more interaction.

My preference is for a more interactive style and distributed authority. Because my span of authority is SO large (in most professional groups it should be about 1:5; my span is an indication of dysfunctional management and budgeting) I depend on my staff to act independently. Nonetheless, I've had to adapt my style of supervision to individuals to get the best work from them.

Cat's experience and reactions may be extreme, but still valid. The mistake he makes is thinking that they represent some sort of grand law of economics.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 5:10 PM

Quote:

The fact is that women have had to fight tooth and nail to get even close to equality with men; if they act the same way as men, they're called bitches, drama queens or "on the rag", whereas the exact same actions from a male are respected, a lot of the time. Not always, there is no "always", it's individual situations. But overall, the FACTS show that women have a long ways to go yet to reach parity with men in the work place. The vast majority in our country of everything, from government to politics to corporations, are still a "good old boy" network, and it'll be a long time before tha changes.



The one place where this DOESN'T hold true at all, at least this year, is in the elections. Look at how many women are using insulting, emasculating language towards their male counterparts, and then look at what happens if a man is even in the same room when it's done to a woman.

"Man up!" "Put your man pants on!" "Grow a set!" "Be a man!" "Have some cajones!"

And the only outrage you've heard about a "sexist" slur is when one of Jerry Brown's staff mentioned calling Meg Whitman a "whore". Which strikes me as odd, since she is the textbook definition of a whore. She's offering to fuck the people of California, for money. You give her money, and she will screw you.

Imagine the outrage is Harry Reid told Sharron Angle not to get her panties in a bunch, or not to get her tit in a wringer about this issue or that. Imagine if Christine O'Donnell's opponent told her to get back in the kitchen where she belongs, and quit acting like something that rhymes with "witch".

Inequality goes both ways, at times.

But people doing the same job should be paid the same amount - a dollar is a dollar, and women currently earn less than 80 cents for every dollar a man in the exact same job is paid.


The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.


Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, October 23, 2010 5:19 PM

Excellent extrapolation, Sig, and you may well be right.

And yes, Mike, I agree wholeheartedly with what you wrote...it does go both ways, and at the moment, it's more tolerated toward men than toward women. May I bring in the decades past when it was perfectly acceptable toward women? To portray them as having no brains, being unable to be professionals, belonging in the kitchen, and all the other sterotypes that held for so very long?

While on some level I like to see us getting our own back, in reality I loathe it every bit as much as when it happens to women.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME