Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread

[Twoflower]

Women and men aren't much different. What is it, like one chromosome out of 26? We are almost completely overlapping magisteria or whatever. Embrace your sameness! Embrace it!

I tried to embrace their sameness once and I ended up with a face full of pepper spray and in the back seat of a squad car.

Next time tell them first.

[Coito ergo sum]

But I'm wondering why people like mozg aren't more numerous. And I suspect it's a subtle question of identity politics.

Among female engineers - and I know many - to a woman, they have all said things that are in agreement with some or all of what mozg states. Generally, it's those that aren't in the field, I've found, that are sure that women are being kept down by sexist males who don't want women working with them....

[mozg]

Women and men aren't much different. What is it, like one chromosome out of 26? We are almost completely overlapping magisteria or whatever. Embrace your sameness! Embrace it!

I tried to embrace their sameness once and I ended up with a face full of pepper spray and in the back seat of a squad car.

Funny, I enjoy having my sameness embraced regularly...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Women and men aren't much different. What is it, like one chromosome out of 26? We are almost completely overlapping magisteria or whatever. Embrace your sameness! Embrace it!

I tried to embrace their sameness once and I ended up with a face full of pepper spray and in the back seat of a squad car.

Other than that, how did you enjoy St. Louis?

[SteveB]

Women and men aren't much different. What is it, like one chromosome out of 26? We are almost completely overlapping magisteria or whatever. Embrace your sameness! Embrace it!

I tried to embrace their sameness once and I ended up with a face full of pepper spray and in the back seat of a squad car.

Funny, I enjoy having my sameness embraced regularly...

My profound thoughts are being made of mockery of. I thought I had the answer for all gender-related problems there.

Oh well, has anyone tried cheese?

[Wumbologist]

Oh well, has anyone tried cheese?

Yes. That reminds me, if I don't get going I'll be late to check in with my parole officer.

[mozg]

But I'm wondering why people like mozg aren't more numerous. And I suspect it's a subtle question of identity politics.

Among female engineers - and I know many - to a woman, they have all said things that are in agreement with some or all of what mozg states. Generally, it's those that aren't in the field, I've found, that are sure that women are being kept down by sexist males who don't want women working with them....

I don't really have a super strong 'gender identity'. I am what I am, but I'm not highly invested in it or anything. I've never felt the need to be thought of as 'appropriately feminine' or whatever. I mean I never really concerned myself with how a girl 'should' behave or think or speak, and can't remember it ever having mattered to me whether other people thought that I was a normal girl.

I haven't really noticed the same thing with the other women at work, who are all far more 'girly' than I am, though.

My profound thoughts are being made of mockery of. I thought I had the answer for all gender-related problems there.

Oh I think there's a lot of good that come from embracing the sameness on a regular basis.

[SteveB]

Oh well, has anyone tried cheese?

Yes. That reminds me, if I don't get going I'll be late to check in with my parole officer.

Yah, you really gotta stop bringing your AK-47 to the bank. People there just get the wrong idea.

[Coito ergo sum]

That's not correct. They aren't made to pay out of pocket. The Violence Against Women Act prohibits women from being made to pay for such kits out of pocket. http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/faq-forensic-examinations.html The reason the cost would show up on a bill is if the law enforcement entity is seeking to recover the cost from an insurance carrier.

Q: VAWA requires a sexual assault victim to have access to an exam free of charge. Does this mean the federal law requires states to pay for the forensic exam?

A: Under 42 U.S.C. § 3796gg-4, a State is not entitled to funds under the STOP Program unless the State or another governmental entity "incurs the full out-of-­pocket cost of forensic medical exams . . . for victims of sexual assault." This means that, if no other governmental entity or insurance carrier pays for the exam, states are required to pay for forensic exams if they wish to receive STOP Program funds. The goal of this provision is to ensure that the victim is not required to pay for the exam.

Once again you seem to be conflating "it's illegal!" with "it doesn't happen!". The article I posted agrees with you that it is illegal under VAWA... but goes on to explain how the laws regarding it are a mess and often inadequate, causing women to end up with a rather large bill for the collection of evidence against their rapist.

Actually, no, women don't end up with the bill. If their insurance company doesn't pay the bill, the State has to. I've looked into this before. Articles such as the one you linked to make the general allegation because the cost showed up on a bill, but what they don't point out is that the women don't have to pay it. It's for insurance purposes.

Some state laws are simply inadequate. For example, Oklahoma's law caps compensation for rape victims at $450. This covers barely one-third of the estimated cost of collecting a rape kit in that state. Maine's law caps compensation at $500.The laws in North Dakota, Oregon, and the District of Columbia allow the victim to seek compensation for any cost she incurs for the collection of her rape kit. This means that the victim may first have to pay the bill herself, and then apply for compensation. In Montana, the victim is supposed to be compensated as long as the victim compensation fund does not run out and as long as she cooperates with the investigation.

More in the article if you'd like to give it a good once-over.

I'll just need you to find an example of a woman who had to pay for her rape kit. There aren't any in the article. The article concerns a woman who "received a bill" -- but, there is no mention of her paying it -- as I said, it's for insurance purposes because sometimes insurance covers it, and if they do, the State wants that money.

As of 2009, States even have to pay for "Jane Doe" rape kits which are given to women anonymously before a report is even taken about a possible rape:
http://www.apbweb.com/featured-articles ... -kits.html A woman can come to law enforcement, state they want a Jane Doe rape kit, and have it done without filing charges. The police will hold, but not open, the rape kit until the woman decides to press charges. This is because they figured that women were chilled from providing the rape kits if they thought they were required to press charges.

I can't say anything about that specific case, but often plea deals are a result of the prosecutor's analysis of what can be proven at trial. Nothing in the article shows that the case wasn't taken seriously. Such things occur with respect to all crimes up to and including murder. Sometimes plea agreements are entered to secure a conviction.

Dude didn't even get a dishonorable discharge.

Let's a assume it's a miscarriage of justice. There are plenty of crimes committed against men that also result in similar miscarriages. This is not evidence that women are being treated worse. It is not evidence of sexism.

Add to that that we don't know the merits or facts of the case. Maybe that plea deal is all the prosecutor could get based on the evidence. It's still a criminal charge and the accused is still entitled to have the prosecutor meet a burden of proof.

Where do you get the idea that I don't think specific violent crimes and miscarriages of justice don't warrant action?

The miscarriage of justice in her rapist being let free is one thing... but unless there's an underlying problem at work, how do you explain the subsequent issue of the girl being kicked off the cheerleading squad for not cheering for her rapist by name?

Because the guy, as the article says, was "cleared" of the rape charge, perhaps?

And, I don't pretend to know the details of the case. I only know you posted an article which clearly assumes the guy's guilt.

Again, it's an isolated case, and isolated garbage and miscarriages of justice happen now and again, to men, women, and children. Unless you're saying it happens IN PARTICULAR or DISPROPORTIONATELY to women, you're not providing evidence of anything relevant to what we're talking about.

The above doesn't prove that people aren't generally being sentenced for the proper amount of time for convictions. You cited two examples of what MAY HAVE BEEN miscarriages of justice. If you think the press doesn't get it wrong in reporting these things, well....

Two specific instances and a third issue regarding a systematic problem in the way law enforcement and the justice system handles rape cases. That was what I pulled from two minutes of Google, and was not intended to be a thorough cataloging of all such instances, but rather a "here's the kind of things I'm talking about".

Well, the thing about the rape kits is bollocks - women aren't made to pay for them, and you didn't show that they were.

And, the two specific instances were clearly biased reporting where the assumption is that the guy was guilty, and that it could be proven in court. And, your assumption is that this kind miscarriage of justice happens more to women than to men in the justice system. If that isn't your assumption, then plainly it's not a sexism issue, but a problem in general in the justice system. And, I never said there weren't problems in the justice system.

So? So, some people think it's a woman's field? That is what you think "keeps" people from going into the field of their choice?

Well, if so, it's just something we'll all have to live with, because it's not something that can be controlled. Some people are going to think nursing is a woman's field, some are going to think butcher or truck driver are men's fields. Oh, well. Like I said, if that's the "problem" left to be solved, then that's not much of a problem.

It won't prevent me from doing anything, because I have a severe shortage of fucks to give. My point, however, is that the societal gender role bias I was referring to does still exist,

So? People make gender role customs by virtue of a consensus of opinion or practice. If I wanted to be a cosmetologist, I'd have to suck up the fact that a lot of people would look at me cross-eyed. Is that a "problem" that needs to be "solved?" Not in my book, it isn't.

and while it won't stop me from going into nursing if I damn well feel like it, I'm probably not a typical example to hold up as to how everyone will react to things. I also live in a relatively progressive part of the country, to boot. I'd imagine someone more susceptible to what other people think, and in a more conservative part of the country, might very well be turned away from a field they might be interested in, and in which they might have great contributions to make. It's not something we just have to "live with", it's something that we should try to improve upon as a society.

Well, like I said, if we're down to arguing over whether nursing is more of a woman's job, then we've pretty much kicked the discrimination problem out of the party -- or, at least it's being handed its hat. To me, the fact that the door is open to you on an equal basis is "the problem" to be solved and it has been solved. Nobody is stopping you from being a nurse. The fact that other people might think less of you for becoming a nurse is not a problem that needs solving. That's just life. People are going to make judgments. They do it all the time.

No, I believe the important things -- job discrimination, education opportunities, etc. -- have been solved.

Because laws!

Right, I've said that before. And, when I say it, you tell me the laws aren't what you're talking about.

Except that those laws aren't always properly followed or enforced and then there's still problems.

Sure they are. Generally speaking, they are. There are miscarriages and times when people make errors and commit frauds -- but, for the most part it's done on an equal basis, and women aren't treated worse than men in this regard.

It's great that we have a mechanism with which to deal with these problems these days, but that mechanism has to be put to good use and ideally we should get to a point where we don't have to use it much, if at all. Legislating a solution to a societal problem has its importance, but ultimately, most such problems have to resolve on a societal level. You go from "I can't discriminate against female employees because it's illegal" to "I won't discriminate against female employees because it's just wrong".

We're pretty much at the latter point for most people. And, the law takes care of the former. Like assault, battery and theft. Most people don't steal or hit each other because they think it's just wrong. Those that do are prosecuted when caught. This is not anything special for or against women.

I believe that people's "attitudes" and whether they think skirts are for women, GI Joe dolls are for boys, or whether pink and blue should have gender meanings, and such, are not really big problems to be solved.

I don't think you fully understand where it becomes a problem. It's not a matter of whether pink or blue have gender meanings. I genuinely like a lot of things that are given a traditionally "masculine" leaning by society. I like pickup trucks and guns, and that's totally cool and not something that society needs to change. It's when Little Jimmy's mother won't let him buy a pink notebook for class, despite his genuinely liking that color, because she thinks it's "for girls", and because later on his classmates might pick on him for having a girly notebook. Gender roles will always exist to some degree, because we ARE different. It's a rigid adherence to them that isn't so good.

Fine, you don't think little Jimmy's mother should be able to raise her son the way she wants. What do you plan to do about it?

And, it's your OPINION that adherence to the gender roles isn't so good. Maybe Jimmy's mother disagrees with you?

I'm fine with you going out and talking to the Jimmy's moms of the world and trying to persuade them, but this is not a "problem" to be solved any more than persuading someone of any political issue is a "problem" to be solved. People are for this or against that and it is a never ending battle and an ongoing debate. It's not a sexism problem to be solved like job discriminaton and education access.

[Wumbologist]

Actually, no, women don't end up with the bill. If their insurance company doesn't pay the bill, the State has to. I've looked into this before. Articles such as the one you linked to make the general allegation because the cost showed up on a bill, but what they don't point out is that the women don't have to pay it. It's for insurance purposes.

It was happening in Wasilla, Alaska until 2000 and was only brought to national attention because of the election:

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-09-21/poli ... M:POLITICS
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/palin- ... rape-kits/

Other cases have been reported on a much more scattered basis, but to be clear, even after VAWA women have ended up with the bill. Yes, as of 2009 states have to pay for Jane Doe kits as well. That's progress, not an indication that there wasn't/isn't a problem. VAWA has been around since 1994 and this was still going on in Wasilla until 2000.

I wonder how many people have gotten billed for collection of evidence when they've been attacked or robbed?

Let's a assume it's a miscarriage of justice. There are plenty of crimes committed against men that also result in similar miscarriages. This is not evidence that women are being treated worse. It is not evidence of sexism.

Add to that that we don't know the merits or facts of the case. Maybe that plea deal is all the prosecutor could get based on the evidence. It's still a criminal charge and the accused is still entitled to have the prosecutor meet a burden of proof.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-par ... 96461.html

Last year, there were an estimated 19,000 military rapes and sexual assaults, but only 3,200 victims reported the attacks and out of those only 191 cases resulted in court martial conviction.

Sounds like a lot of potential miscarriages of justice, especially in conjunction with the military's stance on rape victims and abortion as posted earlier.

Well, if so, it's just something we'll all have to live with, because it's not something that can be controlled. Some people are going to think nursing is a woman's field, some are going to think butcher or truck driver are men's fields. Oh, well. Like I said, if that's the "problem" left to be solved, then that's not much of a problem.

You keep coming back to this refrain, and I'm sorry but it's downright stupid. It most certainly is something that can be controlled. There was a time when the white population in general in the US, even among the educated, thought that blacks were inferior as a race. That's changed a lot, because people worked to change it rather than throwing their hands in the air and saying "That's just life!".

So? People make gender role customs by virtue of a consensus of opinion or practice. If I wanted to be a cosmetologist, I'd have to suck up the fact that a lot of people would look at me cross-eyed. Is that a "problem" that needs to be "solved?" Not in my book, it isn't.

Would there be anything wrong with you being a cosmetologist? If not, and people looked at you cross-eyed for doing something that there is nothing wrong with you doing, yes, that is a flaw in society that can be improved upon.

Well, like I said, if we're down to arguing over whether nursing is more of a woman's job, then we've pretty much kicked the discrimination problem out of the party -- or, at least it's being handed its hat. To me, the fact that the door is open to you on an equal basis is "the problem" to be solved and it has been solved. Nobody is stopping you from being a nurse. The fact that other people might think less of you for becoming a nurse is not a problem that needs solving. That's just life. People are going to make judgments. They do it all the time.

I'm not saying people won't make judgements, I'm saying that those sort of judgements need to eventually become a thing of the past. It shouldn't be "just life" any more than it should be "just life" for people to judge someone for being a different race, or marrying outside of their race, or having a different sexual orientation, etc. Yes, people are allowed to think these things even if we feel they're wrong, but if we want to put an end to intolerance we should discourage it and ward it off with superior logic and reason.

We're pretty much at the latter point for most people. And, the law takes care of the former. Like assault, battery and theft. Most people don't steal or hit each other because they think it's just wrong. Those that do are prosecuted when caught. This is not anything special for or against women.

I think you've been hanging around relatively enlightened parts of the internet too long if you've got this much faith in humanity. There are plenty of people in this country who wouldn't hire a black person, for example, if they thought they could get away with not hiring them because of their race. Maybe I've interacted with more scumbags than you.

And, it's your OPINION that adherence to the gender roles isn't so good. Maybe Jimmy's mother disagrees with you?

I'm fine with you going out and talking to the Jimmy's moms of the world and trying to persuade them, but this is not a "problem" to be solved any more than persuading someone of any political issue is a "problem" to be solved. People are for this or against that and it is a never ending battle and an ongoing debate. It's not a sexism problem to be solved like job discriminaton and education access.

That's pretty much what I'm advocating. I hope you're not insinuating that I think there is some sort of law that can be enacted to force Little Jimmy's mom to buy him a pink notebook, or to make people THINK differently about women, or whatever else.

[hadespussercats]

Just to emphasize/clarify--
I don't think successful engineers have to act like men, whatever that means. And frankly I'm pissed at that notion just as much for how it defines appropriate "male" behavior as for how it dismisses the achievements and womanhood of successful engineers who happen to be women.

What I'm talking about, in terms of math and science skills, goes back to grade school. Why aren't there more girls who really love math and want to pursue a math-heavy field some day as a career? Clearly, there are women who do it. But why are they so few and far between?

I offered up my own experience as an anecdote. But, as I said, I hope it doesn't get spun into a claim that men kept me down.

I honestly couldn't tell you because I wasn't encouraged either way regarding math and science. I went through a period of hating math (largely related to doing long division by hand) that lasted about a year, in which I refused to do any homework. Aside from that my favorite classes in school were always the science and math classes even when they were not easy for me.

My least favorite classes were health and home ec. Bored to fucking tears with those. I did not want anything to do with learning how to sew or care for babies.

Hee! I sew and take care of babies! Well, at the moment, only one. But this is after years of getting shit from my misogynist uncle for being an unrepentantly baby-free career woman winning her family's bread in the evil city of New York.

I consider myself a feminist. My interests have always run the gamut from butch (woodworking, power tools) to girly (lace and pretty hats and dressmaking.)

Over the years I've gotten shit from various sources for not having kids, for being married, for working long hours and never cooking dinner or ironing my husband's clothes or cleaning house, and most recently for being a breeder and a stay-at-home mother.

Whatevs.(actually, I say whateves, but this genuinely irks me and has even made me cry.) I'd say the issue is that people feel free to pursue their interests (so long as they don't hurt anyone or what-have-you) and not be given shit for how their choices challenge others' sense of identity and appropriate behavior.

[Twoflower]

I have a hard time seeing why someones genitalia should define what they do with their lives.

[hadespussercats]

Yeah that's a question I always pondered, what sort of class is women's studies? When I was still in education sociology meant "left liberal ideologues". I'm assuming it's not lectures by Ron Jeremy, so I'm guessing it's a kind of "Look see, all these women in history that were amazing?! We can do it. But forget all them, they don't count. Men stopped us from doing everything!!! And they killed the blacks!!!" white male bashing fest.

If we weren't so fucking great we might get a complex about it.

That's what I don't get. You have all these examples through history of the accomplishments of women like Marie Curie, Ada Lovelace, Margaret Cavendish, Elizabeth Fry, Florence Nightingale, Maria Mitchell and many many more who apparently are not evidence that women are utterly capable of succeeding in the sciences.

It's all 'yeah but those women who do succeed are cowed by men into acting just like men and they're afraid to speak out against the offensiveness that they put up with every day which discourages women from pursuing science and math.'

I've never felt unwelcome or offended by the attitudes of my male colleagues. In fact, being around them was the first place that I found I could really just relax and be myself, where no facade or pretense is needed. It's not act that I put on every day as many of the feminists I talk to tell me. It's not a disguise.

And no matter what I have done, I have never, ever been able to convince a feminist of that.

Just to emphasize/clarify--
I don't think successful engineers have to act like men, whatever that means. And frankly I'm pissed at that notion just as much for how it defines appropriate "male" behavior as for how it dismisses the achievements and womanhood of successful engineers who happen to be women.

What I'm talking about, in terms of math and science skills, goes back to grade school. Why aren't there more girls who really love math and want to pursue a math-heavy field some day as a career? Clearly, there are women who do it. But why are they so few and far between?

I offered up my own experience as an anecdote. But, as I said, I hope it doesn't get spun into a claim that men kept me down.

Well I certainly didn't think you were saying that men were keeping you down. You asked a question. Its interesting to me that you ask it, why would you assume some sort of invisible social pressure that you were not aware of and are not aware of. Isn't that a bit faithy?

I suppose we could look at other advanced and different cultures, like in China Korea and Japan and see if the maths and science classes there have more uptake by women. If so then we have a cultural answer. If not we can keep chasing an imagining until we find it or consider perhaps it's not cultural but inherent.

I never said it was invisible. I said it was subtle.

Cogwheel (?) explained the difference to CES in a post a ways back...

[hadespussercats]

But I'm wondering why people like mozg aren't more numerous. And I suspect it's a subtle question of identity politics.

Among female engineers - and I know many - to a woman, they have all said things that are in agreement with some or all of what mozg states. Generally, it's those that aren't in the field, I've found, that are sure that women are being kept down by sexist males who don't want women working with them....

See, that's why you should have looked at my whole post.

Women have pasts-- experiences as children and young adults that lead them towards one interest over another, or to work on one set of skills over another.

Like I said, I used to get good grades in math. But aside from basic arithmetic and some geometry and trig I use for pattern-making I haven't done any math in 20 years. So I suck at it now. I have the ability. I just haven't used it, because of the other choices I've made.

Why aren't more girls choosing math and science, and thus growing up to be women who do the same?

ETA: I think Aubrey makes an interesting point comparing our results to the women of other cultures.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I have a hard time seeing why someones genitalia should define what they do with their lives.

But I like just dicking around.