Gender Quotas

[Gwazi Magnum]

I feel the need to point out that I recently graduated from the ECE (Early Childhood Education) program at College.

Note this was a program where the majority of my classes had the student ratio of 40+ women and 1 male (me).
Some of the time it was 40+ women and 2 men.
And in one specific class it was 50/50, note this was a summer class though.

And I'd find it completely hilarious if someone tried to enforce gender quota's in that, because it would never work.

First there's the whole aspect of men just not being near as interested in working with children as women are.
Second you would be kicking out a ton of women from a field they want to be in, just imagine the "Patriarchy is invading school!" claims that'd come out of that one.
Third this is also a program where the class (and teacher) can spend a class discussing about "Why are men so Violent?" not in a statistical/on-average manner but in a "All men" manner, and why so many of the students fear men being near little children because they might molest them. Do you really think such a class cares in the slightest to have more men? Or that men care in the slightest for that to be considered part of their professional training?

 

[Astaroth]

If your class is actually like that when it comes to discussions, Gwazi, that's fucked.

Again, a lot of this falls back into gender issues with society in general that stem from placing women into "peaceful, submissive" roles and men into "strong, dominant roles". One of the horrible fallouts from this is that men are viewed as more violent and aggressive. The fact is that abusers and child molesters are not all men, and there should be more public awareness of this.

I know two men- one my close friend, and another family- who have been victims of domestic violence by their wives, and whose children have suffered neglect and abuse from these women as well. In both of these cases, the men were accused by their wives of being the abuser. Neither were found guilty in a court of law, but both experienced a guilty conviction in the court of public opinion- at least for some people. One of them lost his job... which was working at a school, teaching children. One of them lost his daughter.

I do question the notion that men don't often want to work with children. I think that it's possible that your particular experience might be due to more local factors, because that hasn't been my observation. I took a few education prep classes in college, given that my original wish coming out of school was to be an English teacher, and the gender ratio was much more evenly split. Several of my buddies have gone into being teachers or child therapists or camp counselors. One of them is a daycare worker and he loves it. I had more male than female teachers in school, and every pediatrician I had growing up was male. I'm not going to argue that these fields (recently) have a tendency to attract more women than men, but I don't think it's quite THAT slanted.

 

[Brovo]

If your class is actually like that when it comes to discussions, Gwazi, that's fucked.

It's also very normal. Teach - men - not - to - rape is so normal, it's been turned into post-secondary educational classes. As though the general interpretation of men is that they're rampant, violent, sexual predators, who will do anything they can to act out animalistic instincts. Men have been reduced to the status of "animals to be tamed" by some parts of society, and it's been seen as socially acceptable to do so because it's often done in the name of progressive causes. Feminism is one that pops into mind instantly, but there are others that trumpet it too. It's not just calls to educate men, though. There's also been attempts to change the law so as to remove basic human rights from men as well. Such as presumption of innocence in the judicial system.

This shit ain't anything new, and to hear they do it in Gwazi's class is really more the mild end of the typical spectrum. Fear mongering runs rampant on post-secondary institutions right now, for a crime that has a rate of 6.1 out of every 100,000 on college campuses. (Although, being strictly fair, government can't entirely agree on what the rape statistic is either. The CDC disagrees with the criminal justice system as to the prevalence of the crime, and they use different methods for attempting to discern how significant the rate is. Topic for another time, though.)

The unfortunate issue is that society doesn't care if men are abused, raped, or killed, especially when compared to women. It ties less into masculinity or femininity and more into social roles carried over from medieval times. Things which were once necessary for the survival of the species/nation (men were warriors because biological advantages, women were caretakers because biological disposition), are now irrelevant in the face of technological advances. Changing those things ain't easy.

Also, I'm not going to pretend that women don't have issues either. Just to clarify that. They do. Just figured that if you were surprised by this, I'd bring you up to speed that it's not only normal, it's considered socially acceptable by a significant minority of the population. (I can't say "the majority" because as per the usual, the majority is silent.)

As for everything else you've said, I'm pretty much in at least partial agreement. Especially the children thing: The barriers that once put men away from children have been broken down pretty hard over the centuries. Now if only the rest of social progress could catch up. A pity, how slow it is.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

If your class is actually like that when it comes to discussions, Gwazi, that's fucked.

I've got more bizarre stories too.
Including one about how they begged the teacher to not teach them about Child Abuse, and succeed.
(Actually I end up referencing other stories down below, so I'll just highlight them in yellow when it comes up).

I actually a rant about that on Iwaku a few months ago when the topic came up.

Again, a lot of this falls back into gender issues with society in general that stem from placing women into "peaceful, submissive" roles and men into "strong, dominant roles". One of the horrible fallouts from this is that men are viewed as more violent and aggressive. The fact is that abusers and child molesters are not all men, and there should be more public awareness of this.

Like Brovo said, that's muddied by a ton of human history that we now need to train ourselves out of.

That being said though, human history was only like that because that was a biological truth.
Men were on average more fit than women and more eager to fight, we evolved that way for survival.

But it has created an ugly mentality now where people not only want to keep the practices of ancient times, but like to generalizes averages into being about the entire demographic.

I know two men- one my close friend, and another family- who have been victims of domestic violence by their wives, and whose children have suffered neglect and abuse from these women as well. In both of these cases, the men were accused by their wives of being the abuser. Neither were found guilty in a court of law, but both experienced a guilty conviction in the court of public opinion- at least for some people. One of them lost his job... which was working at a school, teaching children. One of them lost his daughter.

Damn. :/

I can get the teacher one, employers (annoyingly) reserve rights to hire employee's for personal reasons as long as that isn't what's put on paper.
But their daughter? Wouldn't such a thing require a court order and not just boss bias? How did that happen if we was proven innocent in the court of law?

I do question the notion that men don't often want to work with children. I think that it's possible that your particular experience might be due to more local factors, because that hasn't been my observation. I took a few education prep classes in college, given that my original wish coming out of school was to be an English teacher, and the gender ratio was much more evenly split. Several of my buddies have gone into being teachers or child therapists or camp counselors. One of them is a daycare worker and he loves it. I had more male than female teachers in school, and every pediatrician I had growing up was male. I'm not going to argue that these fields (recently) have a tendency to attract more women than men, but I don't think it's quite THAT slanted.

It might be a local thing, cause looking back on it I've had more female teachers than male (not to near the ratio for my ECE classes, but females were still a small majority).

However it should also be noted the specifics of the program I graduated from.
Early Childhood Education is strictly for children of ages 6 and younger, the only places an ECE is licensed to work in is the Kindergarten Classroom (where they also want to replace the teacher with another ECE) and in Child Care centers.

These aren't your specialized therapist (even if they claim to be) and they aren't your Grade 1-12 teachers either.

 

[Kestrel]

Third this is also a program where the class (and teacher) can spend a class discussing about "Why are men so Violent?" not in a statistical/on-average manner but in a "All men" manner, and why so many of the students fear men being near little children because they might molest them.

I both want to and don't want to be present in this class, but I'm afraid that they might not appreciate comments like "Are you sure you want to backtalk me, woman? I might get angry enough to take it out on the children."

Also fun fact; women are responsible for the majority of infanticide. Regardless, we trust women to be midwives. I wonder why. Maybe because we don't judge an entire gender based on the actions of individuals.

That they're putting this kind of mindset in front of classes, poisoning children in distrusting men as a whole, is terrible for reasons I hopefully need not explain.

 

[Astaroth]

Oh yeah, Brovo, the notions aren't new to me, just... still fucked. I've actually experienced an issue myself where a kid I was babysitting tried to get me in trouble by claiming I hit him in the junk, and it was one of the most ice-in-veins chilling moments of my life. I also had a female friend that I joke-flirted with call me creepy and it completely shocked me. And part of me actually worries that by posting this, now people will wonder if or presume that I am creepy. o__o

@Gen. Gwazi Senpai
He wasn't convicted of any abuse, but there was enough doubt in the case to have him found an unfit parent. The only good side is that the mother was found to be unfit as well, but unfortunately there were no relatives to take her so she's in foster care.

Men are absolutely victims of the same gender issues that victimize women. Feminism- actual root feminism, which simply aims to make women be treated no differently from men- helps everyone. (I hate that people skew what feminism is and twist it around to just make things a different kind of fucked up, and I hate that people associate the crazy-as-balls groups more with the word now.)

 

[Brovo]

Men are absolutely victims of the same gender issues that victimize women. Feminism- actual root feminism, which simply aims to make women be treated no differently from men- helps everyone. (I hate that people skew what feminism is and twist it around to just make things a different kind of fucked up, and I hate that people associate the crazy-as-balls groups more with the word now.)

Agreed. A few months ago I was one of those people who hated all feminism, but, being the skeptically-driven fellow that I am, I questioned my own beliefs and investigated further to find that feminism is not a united front. It's several different schisms in one, kind of like different versions of the protestant church: All have the same (general) principles, they go about it differently though. I like individualist feminists. I like feminists that promote equality of opportunity and desire to see women granted the ability to make choices. In fact, I'd probably call myself a feminist if it weren't for how poisoned the label has become in recent years.

It's the screeching, intersectional, "everything must be equitable", pseudo-communist feminists that irritate and sometimes scare me for their scapegoating of men.

I've even been tempted to make a thread on feminism and its various different strands, but, I've a feeling it'd go something like this...

 

[Astaroth]

I used to avoid calling myself a feminist due to the associations, but I realized that's doing a disservice to the ideals and contributing to the perpetuation of those poisonous overtones. It's like when I used to avoid calling myself pansexual due to the negative stereotypes associated with that. If the only people who call themselves pansexual are the ones who make the rest of us look like sexually aggressive special snowflakes, we'll never get people to stop treating us like sexually aggressive special snowflakes. It's far better to be an example of someone who breaks that mold.

So I call myself a feminist and get accused of being pussy-whipped, but lol whatever.

 

[Space Cowboy]

I am forever feminist. The status quo fucks everybody up, not just women. Sooner we figure that out, the better.

 

[Hellis]

I am forever feminist. The status quo fucks everybody up, not just women. Sooner we figure that out, the better.

Aye. I will never stop calling me a feminist. Despite having people call me a "Beta male" "Pussy-whipped" or the like. I am proud to stand for something that true and good.

 

[Brovo]

So I call myself a feminist and get accused of being pussy-whipped, but lol whatever.

I am forever feminist. The status quo fucks everybody up, not just women. Sooner we figure that out, the better.

Aye. I will never stop calling me a feminist. Despite having people call me a "Beta male" "Pussy-whipped" or the like. I am proud to stand for something that true and good.

Best of luck, gentlemen. I'll be your devil's advocate.

 

[Astaroth]

DIBS ARAMIS.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

@Gen. Gwazi Senpai
He wasn't convicted of any abuse, but there was enough doubt in the case to have him found an unfit parent. The only good side is that the mother was found to be unfit as well, but unfortunately there were no relatives to take her so she's in foster care.

Wait, they can do that? o_o
How the hell does 'doubt in case' even work?
You're guilty or you're innocent... At least that's how it's meant to work.

Damn, the child custody thing is even worse than I thought. >.<

Men are absolutely victims of the same gender issues that victimize women. Feminism- actual root feminism, which simply aims to make women be treated no differently from men- helps everyone. (I hate that people skew what feminism is and twist it around to just make things a different kind of fucked up, and I hate that people associate the crazy-as-balls groups more with the word now.)

Men are definitely victims of the same stuff, I'm not arguing that for a second.
I was just explaining as to why that bias was in place to begin with.

Funny (paraphrased) quote on that any ways.

In a hospital room there is a patient on the hospital bed recovering.
When someone come's in to visit they notice a giant hole in the wall.
They asked the patient "How did the hole get in that wall?" and the patient replies "A car drove through it".

No where in this instance is the patient suggesting "The Wall had it coming" or "That wall deserved it", nor was he defending the hole being there.
He was simply providing the explanation for why there was a hole in the wall.

Not directed at you btw, I just found it funny and relevant.

Any ways, whenever I talk about feminism I always make sure to clarify it with 1st, 2nd or 3rd wave feminism.
If I'm talking 3rd wave, that's when I'm referring to the ones who skewed it.

There are actually some good feminists out there.
Though I personally choose to identify as Egalitarian instead.

Not because of the 3rd wave stuff. But because the way I see it a dedicated movement like feminism was needed in a past, when there was clear bias against women.
But in modern society? We need a change of approach to be about people period, and a name like feminism doesn't help get that across.

 

[Space Cowboy]

DIBS PORTHOS

 

[Sidhe]

I have to say I'm quite pleased by all the pro-feminism posts here. I remember coming here a few months back and seeing rampant 'ALL FEMINISM IS BAD, FEMINISTS ARE EVIL MAN HATERS' posts littering GD, so this warms the cockles of my black heart.

 

[Hellis]

GODDAMMNIT I WAS LATE TO CLAIMING A MUSKETEER

 

[Astaroth]

@Hellis

THAT'S OKAY, YOU GET ATHOS. ATHOS IS LEGIT.

 

[Hellis]

I GET TO BANG MADAMME WINTER!?

Alsoigetobealcoholic

 

[Space Cowboy]

Yeah, but I get a whore house. I think I'm better.

 

[☆Luna☆]

I think the thing that scares me about radical social justice types is that sometimes the things they preach against are held sincerely for the reason that they themselves have an unhealthy view of the world. Some people believe the world is out to get them even when that is not the case. Some people view themselves as a victim in the face of overwhelming support. Some people assume that everyone holds a toxic view of particular groups because they themselves struggle with treating people equally.

This isn't something which I see to be extremely prevalent, but when I do see it, I actually feel scared. These kinds of characteristics are something I put in the villains I create for roleplays. Something intended to be easily recognizable tropes which indicate a disturbed mind. When I see these characteristics in the real world, I become scared for the reason that I understand that they have been poisoned in such a way that no amount of reasoning or fact will dissuade them.

The reason why feminism in itself is something I don't consider healthy is not because you cannot do good things under its banner. Quite the opposite, as feminism does cause very powerful social change. In specializing on women, it can tackle problems in a way that might be unwieldy to egalitarians. The reason I find feminism unhealthy is because it encourages viewing women as victims. Unlike egalitarians who look at ALL cases of inequality, a feminist concerns themselves primarily with womens' issues. The movement by design will result in some of its members being underexposed to the issues of men, leading them to the conclusion that men are more privileged.

And just to make this extremely clear, I am not saying people should not be feminists, or that all feminists focus their efforts exclusively on women. In fact, many like to state that feminism is about equality for all genders. I merely wanted to point out that feminism has differentiated itself by a focus on women, which is evident in the name; and that the consequence of disproportionately covering one gender's problems over another leads many to believe it is more prevalent.

A practical demonstration of this effect is police brutality as depicted in the media. When you show exclusively police misconduct, and never take time to show the outstanding conduct of policemen, the result is a good chunk of the population believing that police are brutal monsters who beat minorities. It isn't that there is actually a large number of bad cops, but instead there is large coverage over them. If feminists do not spend some of their time exposing themselves to injustices outside their cause, they are susceptible to this dangerous illusion.

Also drawing parallels to the reaction to police brutality, this gets brought to the next level when radicals enter the mix. For they then use these illusions to justify horrible acts. Off the top of my head, I can recall certain radical feminists: attacking someone accused of rape before any actual evidence was provided, defending women who falsely accused men of rape, spending thousands of dollars of public money to campaign against manspreading(spreading legs too much on public transportation), getting people fired from their jobs simply for disagreeing on the internet, stealing money which was intended to help their own cause, and making a woman flee the country out of the fear she would be killed for opening a domestic abuse shelter for men.

After seeing these things happen, my largest concern is that these people are not in jail. Though, I've strayed a bit far from the original topic of gender based quotas. So, I will at least conclude with my basic position on these.

I think it is a little weird that people would even want to be hired because of a quota. It is one of those illusions of the law that seems like it is being helpful, but in reality only hurts everyone involved. This becomes most obvious when you consider the following nearly exhaustive list of possible outcomes. I left out H1Q0S1 due to a lack of relevance to the effectiveness of quotas. Condition notation in parenthesis. H=Hired, Q=Quota Considered a Factor, S=Sexism Considered a Factor, 0=false, 1=true

1. You are hired without a quota being considered(H1Q0S0). The quota is non-effective.
2. You are hired specifically because of a quota, but not because of sexism(H1Q1S0). You aren't the most qualified for a job, or needlessly replaced someone who was. The quota is adverse.
3. You are hired specifically because of a quota, in spite of the employer being sexist(H1Q1S1). You are now working for someone who undervalues you based on your gender, and may systematically disadvantage you. The quota is adverse.
4. You are not hired in spite of a quota(they already met it) because of the employer being sexist(H0Q0S1). You may seek legal remedies if possible. The quota is ineffective.
5. You are not hired specifically because of a quota, and the employer is sexist(H0Q1S1). The quota supports a sexist agenda. The quota is adverse.
6. You are not hired specifically because of a quota, but not because of sexism(H0Q1S0). You were the most qualified for a job, but were not selected. The quota is adverse.
7. You are not hired without a quota being considered(H0Q0S0). The quota is non-effective.

Notice how none of these situations are particularly favorable, and how many of them actually defeat their intended purpose. Quotas are a terrible idea that rarely have their intended effect. I agree that people should not be discriminated based on their gender, but this should be promoted in the form of understanding how a diversity of background generally makes organization more responsive to the needs of their customers. If someone has a problem with sexist tendencies, then rather than forcing that person to hire a certain number of women, it might be more effective to simply replace the person in charge of hiring. They don't even need to be fired, simply assign them other duties. If it is a company of a size large enough to matter, this should be an available remedy.

TL;DR: Quotas don't accomplish what they set out to. Feminism can cause people to view men as oppressors due to a lack of exposure to male issues.