TOTALLY GEEKED!

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It is not sexist to acknowledge the differences and preferences of men and women. It is sexist to dismiss or overlook or mistreat someone because of their gender.

MOST knitters are women, that's just a fact. It is not sexist to say so.

---

 But it IS sexist to assume that a man doesn't like knitting simply because he is a man. 

---

Sure.  But does it matter if I ask the man or woman where the nearest yarn store is?

 

And more importantly, is it sexist to prefer some activities be just women because I am a woman?  So, I invite women to my knitting circle but not men? 

---

 If the men knit, then yes, you should invite them too. If you want it to be all women, then it's more of a fellowship circle who happens to knit. If khitting is the purpose and the focus, then it should not matter the sex of the participants. If talking and fellowship is the main focus, then fine. But call it what it is. 

---

 Well why isnt that " sexist",?  So you can prefer the company of women but men cant prefer the company of men?  Dont men talk and want fellowship too?  Pretty "sexist". Lol

---

  No it isn't sexist to want to have a fellowship hour with the same sex. It's more comfortable for women to talk with other women about things  regarding women. 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Not really. It is playing the odds. Most men don't like knitting so it isnt " sexist" to just make a quick assumption. Is it sexist to think some woman carries a purse? Well maybe she does not but that doesn't make someone a sexist pig for that initial thought.

---

 To me, there is a huge difference between being sexist and being a sexist pig. Sexist is telling me I don't have to go to a meeting since I have a family. Sexist pigs would tell me to get back in the kitchen and quit trying to be a man. 

 

Playimg the odds sounds an awful lot like generalizing. It's a dangerous game...a slippery slope. 

---

 Generalizing is normal.  More men than women like football.  If I ask the girls on a shopping trip on Superbowl Sunday, I'm not being sexist - they are welcome to decline and stay and watch football if they want.  Just like I don't care if the men don't invite me to poker night, even though I like to play poker. 

Some things are just not worth that much ire.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Not really. It is playing the odds. Most men don't like knitting so it isnt " sexist" to just make a quick assumption. Is it sexist to think some woman carries a purse? Well maybe she does not but that doesn't make someone a sexist pig for that initial thought.

---

 To me, there is a huge difference between being sexist and being a sexist pig. Sexist is telling me I don't have to go to a meeting since I have a family. Sexist pigs would tell me to get back in the kitchen and quit trying to be a man. 

 

Playimg the odds sounds an awful lot like generalizing. It's a dangerous game...a slippery slope. 

---

 Generalizing is normal.  More men than women like football.  If I ask the girls on a shopping trip on Superbowl Sunday, I'm not being sexist - they are welcome to decline and stay and watch football if they want.  Just like I don't care if the men don't invite me to poker night, even though I like to play poker. 

Some things are just not worth that much ire.

---

 Exactly.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

People think way too much about this. Unless it affects my job or rights, I really don't care. Men and women are different - that's just the way it is. There is never going to be true equality - the sooner people realize that, the happier they will be.

---

 But that doesn't mean that a man can't be a seamstress or a woman can't be a mechanic (Hi, Vette!)

And MM has given examples of how sexism affected HER job.

flan

---

 So, where have I said differently?  Did you miss the "unless it affects my job or rights" part of the sentence?

---

I saw that, actually.

The less blatant examples are still sexism, imo.

flan 

Life isn't fair. Oh well. I

But why is it ok for men to coach women but not vice versa?

Lol!

Ilumine wrote:

---

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

I don't know. I don't see a lot of things as sexist that others do. Asking a woman about food doesn't seem sexist to me. It seem normal. Same with asking guys about electronics.

I ask guys about car stuff. I ask women about household stuff. Guess I am sexist too.

Oh well.

---

 Well, yes you are. 

 

My husband is the better cook than I.  When it comes to military history, from logistics to troop movements to how a battle, thus the war could be won by the advent of a new weapon, to the political backgrounds I know more even though DH is a 28 yo military retiree. 

He isn't any more feminine and I am not any more masculine.  But you would be highly sexist to assume that I would know about food and DH would know more about the military.  

---

 Thank you. Well said. 

Ilumine wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I don't think it is sexist to acknowledge biological differences in men and women. My sons take out the trash. They clean out the gutters and mow the lawn. Dd helps care for the home in other ways. I call my sons and DH to lify heavy stuff. I expect my sons to open doors.

---

 I think that's perfectly fine. I'm a female.  There are things I just can't do. 

---

 Oh, BS. There are very few things you cant do as a female, and they all actively involve a penis. 

There are a few things I cant do because I am not strong enough. But you know what? I am stronger than some guys I know. There is basically no skill i cant master only because of my gender. 

---

 I'm not that strong and I am not tall enough sometimes. I can do lots that a man can do and probably do it better. But it's not BS.

---

 And this is the whole point of today's sexism that you are buying into.  

Why yes, YOU may be too short or too weak to do job X and so may 90% of the female population.  But the problem lies in not recognizing that the 10% who are tall or strong enough SHOULD be able to have the opportunity to do Job X without having to work harder or longer to prove that they can do the job AND get paid the same amount as their male counterpart.  

And this is coming from someone who firmly believes that society should NOT lower physical standards to allow women into manly jobs, such as firefighting or certain military MOSes.  If a woman can haul a 300 lb man up/down a ladder in the same amount of time as a man, she should not have to work harder, suck up the worse schedules, and have a harder time progressing up the professional ladder. 

---

 Preach sister! 

 

And she should not have to endure sexual harrassment while she does it! No rape jokes, no jerking hand motions behind her back, no talking about what she looks like naked while she is at work. Treat her as a professional. 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I don't think it is sexist to acknowledge biological differences in men and women. My sons take out the trash. They clean out the gutters and mow the lawn. Dd helps care for the home in other ways. I call my sons and DH to lify heavy stuff. I expect my sons to open doors.

---

 I think that's perfectly fine. I'm a female.  There are things I just can't do. 

---

 Oh, BS. There are very few things you cant do as a female, and they all actively involve a penis. 

There are a few things I cant do because I am not strong enough. But you know what? I am stronger than some guys I know. There is basically no skill i cant master only because of my gender. 

---

 I'm not that strong and I am not tall enough sometimes. I can do lots that a man can do and probably do it better. But it's not BS.

---

 And this is the whole point of today's sexism that you are buying into.  

Why yes, YOU may be too short or too weak to do job X and so may 90% of the female population.  But the problem lies in not recognizing that the 10% who are tall or strong enough SHOULD be able to have the opportunity to do Job X without having to work harder or longer to prove that they can do the job AND get paid the same amount as their male counterpart.  

And this is coming from someone who firmly believes that society should NOT lower physical standards to allow women into manly jobs, such as firefighting or certain military MOSes.  If a woman can haul a 300 lb man up/down a ladder in the same amount of time as a man, she should not have to work harder, suck up the worse schedules, and have a harder time progressing up the professional ladder. 

---

 Preach sister! 

 

And she should not have to endure sexual harrassment while she does it! No rape jokes, no jerking hand motions behind her back, no talking about what she looks like naked while she is at work. Treat her as a professional. 

---

 Have you never heard how guys talk to and seen how they treat each other? Want to be part of the guys club? Don't expect to be treated like a woman. 

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:

---

Southern_Belle wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

I don't think it is sexist to acknowledge biological differences in men and women. My sons take out the trash. They clean out the gutters and mow the lawn. Dd helps care for the home in other ways. I call my sons and DH to lify heavy stuff. I expect my sons to open doors.

---

 I think that's perfectly fine. I'm a female.  There are things I just can't do. 

---

 Oh, BS. There are very few things you cant do as a female, and they all actively involve a penis. 

There are a few things I cant do because I am not strong enough. But you know what? I am stronger than some guys I know. There is basically no skill i cant master only because of my gender. 

---

 I'm not that strong and I am not tall enough sometimes. I can do lots that a man can do and probably do it better. But it's not BS.

---

 And this is the whole point of today's sexism that you are buying into.  

Why yes, YOU may be too short or too weak to do job X and so may 90% of the female population.  But the problem lies in not recognizing that the 10% who are tall or strong enough SHOULD be able to have the opportunity to do Job X without having to work harder or longer to prove that they can do the job AND get paid the same amount as their male counterpart.  

And this is coming from someone who firmly believes that society should NOT lower physical standards to allow women into manly jobs, such as firefighting or certain military MOSes.  If a woman can haul a 300 lb man up/down a ladder in the same amount of time as a man, she should not have to work harder, suck up the worse schedules, and have a harder time progressing up the professional ladder. 

---

 Preach sister! 

 

And she should not have to endure sexual harrassment while she does it! No rape jokes, no jerking hand motions behind her back, no talking about what she looks like naked while she is at work. Treat her as a professional. 

---

Everyone should be treated like a professional at work.   

And on the note of the phsiological and genetic differences between men and women...I call bull**** on that too.

The testosterone that makes men bigger, taller and stronger than women also make them:
1) more agressive/risk takers - thus putting them into the position to make the wrong choices due to competition.
2) are more prone to being anxious and having more concentration issues - again back to poor decision making
3) are more violent, criminal and psychotic - there are a number of studies that show that men with higher testosterone are more rambunctious and less behaved...which affects decision making and personal control issues.

And the estrogen that makes women smaller also makes them:
1) have better neuron growth - which leads to better brain processing
2) improved cognition - better brain processing and choice making.
3) more stable moods, even though we joke about the "time of the month" - decisions are made based on fact vs the pull of competition.

There are a number of other physical/psychological differences between men and women that, seemingly should put women ahead of men in the business world. Women use more white matter vs men's gray matter when thinking. This means that men have a much harder time transitioning between subjects and men get tunnel vision when working on/out a problem. Women can sit still for longer periods because of the differences in the serotonin and oxcytocin levels and they have a better time working out stress. Women's hippocampus are larger, therefore we take in more information from our 5 senses then men.

I can see a number of important jobs/careers that would be enhanced by these physical differences in women and yet are very much considered MANS job.

The fact that a woman would pigeon hole another woman out of these jobs because they can ONLY see the body differences or believe that being aggressive/competitive is the only way to go is sad and actually hinders the entire human race as a whole. Personally, I would want a woman on the front lines fighting for our country BECAUSE of her ability to have a more stable mood while processing the bigger picture of the battlefiled because she used her 5 senses and not allowed the testosterone to make a riskier decision based on competition.

But that's just me.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Not really. It is playing the odds. Most men don't like knitting so it isnt " sexist" to just make a quick assumption. Is it sexist to think some woman carries a purse? Well maybe she does not but that doesn't make someone a sexist pig for that initial thought.

---

 To me, there is a huge difference between being sexist and being a sexist pig. Sexist is telling me I don't have to go to a meeting since I have a family. Sexist pigs would tell me to get back in the kitchen and quit trying to be a man. 

 

Playimg the odds sounds an awful lot like generalizing. It's a dangerous game...a slippery slope. 

---

 Generalizing is normal.  More men than women like football.  If I ask the girls on a shopping trip on Superbowl Sunday, I'm not being sexist - they are welcome to decline and stay and watch football if they want.  Just like I don't care if the men don't invite me to poker night, even though I like to play poker. 

Some things are just not worth that much ire.

---

 And how much of this generalization is based on what these men and women have been TAUGHT they are supposed to like, vs a true genetic predisposition?  Sure, there are some psychological traits that are influenced by testosterone and estrogen, but being more aggressive or competitive should not be defined by society.  

Hell, American society finds that men should love FOOTBALL and BASEBALL, but they find the British Crown's obsession with Tennis and Cricket as being wussy?  This is solely based on NURTURE vs NATURE.  

And women who play into the belief system that these preferences are based on genetics perpetuate sexism.  

---

OH pffs.  Generalizing is the NORM.  When you walk in to sit on a chair, you are GENERALIZING that this particular chair is going to hold you up.  You don't walk in and analyze every freaking thing looking for the exception to the rule.  Yes, a lot of men like football.  So, maybe you start to talk about it.  And, he says, Oh I don't watch that, I like X.  Then you move on and talk about X.  That doesn't make you a "sexist". 

---

And YOU just made my point. YOU meet a guy for the first time and YOUR immediate choice of conversation is to ask him if he likes football, NOT general conversation to even see if he likes sports.  Two ASSumptions right off the bat.  

My point is, the SOCIETY one lives in has created the idea of what Masculine vs Feminine traits are supposed to be.  In America, we jump to specific sports as being masculine while in other countries, the ideal MALE is something different.  In France, there is nothing unmanly with Fencing and American Football is not considered manly, but barbaric. 

So can't one extrapolate from these cultural differences between what SPORT is masculine that maybe, just maybe the interest in sports as being the epitome of manhood is also culturally based vs a true physical/chemical/psychological difference between the sexes?  

Why is it so hard to even postulate that?  And why then, should we as a human race, look at the genetic physical/chemical/psychological differences between men and women and then apply the positive reception/uses of those differences equally?  I mean, if you are going to go out on some limb and say that it is ok for men to have certain jobs because they are just BORN different/better, then let us re-assess the entire job market on those physical/chemical/psychological differences. 

 

No. Thinking any thing is ever truly equal is ignorant.

Being upset over something so trivial as the things you have brought up is ridiculous.

"I want to be treated just like a man but remember I am a woman!"

That is an oxymoron.

And yes, a woman who gets so offended by these things like the food and tech stuff does appear insecure to me.

I don't feel the need to kick and fight to prove I am strong enough, smart enough, able enough. I know I am. If someone thinks I am not, then that is their mistake. I won't let it bother me.

Someone who does let it bother them still seems to think they have something to prove.

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Ilumine wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Not really. It is playing the odds. Most men don't like knitting so it isnt " sexist" to just make a quick assumption. Is it sexist to think some woman carries a purse? Well maybe she does not but that doesn't make someone a sexist pig for that initial thought.

---

 To me, there is a huge difference between being sexist and being a sexist pig. Sexist is telling me I don't have to go to a meeting since I have a family. Sexist pigs would tell me to get back in the kitchen and quit trying to be a man. 

 

Playimg the odds sounds an awful lot like generalizing. It's a dangerous game...a slippery slope. 

---

 Generalizing is normal.  More men than women like football.  If I ask the girls on a shopping trip on Superbowl Sunday, I'm not being sexist - they are welcome to decline and stay and watch football if they want.  Just like I don't care if the men don't invite me to poker night, even though I like to play poker. 

Some things are just not worth that much ire.

---

 And how much of this generalization is based on what these men and women have been TAUGHT they are supposed to like, vs a true genetic predisposition?  Sure, there are some psychological traits that are influenced by testosterone and estrogen, but being more aggressive or competitive should not be defined by society.  

Hell, American society finds that men should love FOOTBALL and BASEBALL, but they find the British Crown's obsession with Tennis and Cricket as being wussy?  This is solely based on NURTURE vs NATURE.  

And women who play into the belief system that these preferences are based on genetics perpetuate sexism.  

---

OH pffs.  Generalizing is the NORM.  When you walk in to sit on a chair, you are GENERALIZING that this particular chair is going to hold you up.  You don't walk in and analyze every freaking thing looking for the exception to the rule.  Yes, a lot of men like football.  So, maybe you start to talk about it.  And, he says, Oh I don't watch that, I like X.  Then you move on and talk about X.  That doesn't make you a "sexist". 

---

And YOU just made my point. YOU meet a guy for the first time and YOUR immediate choice of conversation is to ask him if he likes football, NOT general conversation to even see if he likes sports.  Two ASSumptions right off the bat.  

My point is, the SOCIETY one lives in has created the idea of what Masculine vs Feminine traits are supposed to be.  In America, we jump to specific sports as being masculine while in other countries, the ideal MALE is something different.  In France, there is nothing unmanly with Fencing and American Football is not considered manly, but barbaric. 

So can't one extrapolate from these cultural differences between what SPORT is masculine that maybe, just maybe the interest in sports as being the epitome of manhood is also culturally based vs a true physical/chemical/psychological difference between the sexes?  

Why is it so hard to even postulate that?  And why then, should we as a human race, look at the genetic physical/chemical/psychological differences between men and women and then apply the positive reception/uses of those differences equally?  I mean, if you are going to go out on some limb and say that it is ok for men to have certain jobs because they are just BORN different/better, then let us re-assess the entire job market on those physical/chemical/psychological differences. 

 

---

Oh who cares?  Wow.  I have plenty of other knots in my underwear to worry about.  Sorry but that isn't on my radar.  Being a woman has not held me back from doing anything I want to do.  And, I make as much money as the man next to me.  And, do you know why?  Because I NEGOTIATED.  Something many women don't do.  Then, they don't and blame men for their lack of negotiation skills. 

The responses here were easily anticipated and unsurprising. That's unfortunate.

voiceofreason wrote:

---

The responses here were easily anticipated and unsurprising. That's unfortunate.

---

Oh pffs.  Lighten up!   

Of course, I posted a long time ago about Coaching and sports and got bee-itched slapped for saying that there was sexism in sports. Soooo , go figure!

Yes Flan. I have spoken. As is My right as a member of this message board.

You don't agree with my opinion. That is your right.

But could you use more sound reasoning in your responses? Something more than those cute little snide comments you make perhaps?

Flan Vs Lilly! Go!

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

No. I am telling you my view point on the subject.

How ever the very one saying sexism is wrong is also saying I am a stupid woman for not sharing her view point.

And now you are also trying to call me names and put me down for my view point.

So tell me? Who is the sexist one?

---

Sexism DOES NOT MEAN close-minded.

flan 

Of course.

Good! That means you are using it.

lilyofcourse wrote:

---

And I thought you were watching T.V.?

---

And I thought you were using your brain?

flan