The Cellar - The Gender Equality Checkpoint

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The Gender Equality Checkpoint (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=30908)

Hehehehehe. I comment if they've clearly got new clothes or are all dolled up for going out.

The problem is you can't know what someone else is thinking. They may have done something they feel makes them, like totally like different like ya know, but it's such a slight difference it could has been accidental or random. When nobody says anything, they're devastated. Or spent three hours fighting s blackhead or stray wisp of hair, then giving up. When somebody notices they're devastated. To be clear, this is not a female thing, it's a human thing.
I remember Calvin bitching to Hobbes, what good is it to have superhero underwear if nobody comments on it.

True enough. It was more when they were youngsters really. Mum and I realised that the first thing we always said to the girls, in our greetings, was pretty much to the effect that they looked nice. We just tried to be a bit more conscious of stuff and maybe mix it up a bit.

It's hard though - because the pair of them are and always have been drop dead gorgeous.

In truth, it is often one of the first things I say to my bro as well when I see him. Because he is a bit of a style freak (style not fashion, I hasten to add) and likes to look good - he often has new clothes and it is instinctive to me to mention it.

But he isn't surrounded by 24/7 cultural messaging telling him his looks are his most important quality.

This made me smile a lot. These young lads are very impressive.

Quote:

Long before the idea of ending female genital mutilation (FGM) was gaining traction among world leaders, a group of young Maasai men were already questioning the need for the brutal practice.

“Female genital mutilation is part of our culture and practice and it marks the transition from childhood to adulthood, of women from girls. We now realise FGM is one of the practices we should not have in our society. It’s not helping us but affecting our girls and mothers and wives,” says Sonyanga Ole Ngais, one of the stars of a new documentary that charts how a cricket team formed in the shadows of Mount Kenya helped change attitudes towards the practice.

Quote:

Interspersed with shots of life at home as they prepare for the trip, their arrival in the UK, and their first visit to Lord’s, we hear the team talking about FGM and the lack of women’s rights in the region, views in stark contrast to those expressed by Maasai elders.

Quote:

“It started a long time ago when we were young and our sisters were being married off and not completing school,” says Ngais, in London this week to promote the film.

“When I was young I remember very well my last sister to undergo the cut [FGM], and she was married off. I really liked her and was really sad and cried a lot when she was married off. She was like my mother, taking care of me … when she was married I realised I was not going to have that company. I was not going to see her.”

Ngais, 26, had already seen three other sisters undergo FGM, drop out of school and marry young; culture dictates that girls should be cut before they are married. FGM has been banned in Kenya for years.

The pain of losing his sister to marriage never left him. And as Ngais grew older and came to understand more about what girls went through, he began to question the importance of FGM in the Maasai culture, and started talking to his friends about it.

“When I grew up I started to realise what these people were doing … it was not nice, it was inhuman.”

By this time, he had a younger sister, Eunice. He was determined that she would not be cut.

“I realised I was not ready to lose another sister,” Ngais said. “I had the passion to fight for women’s rights in our society.

“We have to realise girls have their rights and need to study. They don’t need the brutality of FGM.”

These young men, having left their communities, travelled and therefore gained wisdom, were given a hearing by their elders. They were asked whether they would marry a girl who had not been cut. Their response was tovow only tomarry girls who had not been cut. Since the parents of girls want most for them to be married - the most eligible and celebrated bachelors of their community refusing to marry girls who have been cut carries serious weight.

Read the rest here:

http://www.theguardian.com/global-de...s-championship

This, on the other hand, did not make me want to smile. This is a piece from the Guardian, about the author's experience of travelling home from a show with her 13 year old daughter.

Quote:

It was pretty late when we boarded the train, and the carriage was almost full of other theatregoers on their way home. My daughter was sitting on my right and the only free seat was on my left. After a couple of stops, a man got on. It was hard to tell, but he was probably in his 30s. He cast his eyes around the carriage before declaring, quite loudly, that someone would have to move. “I want to sit opposite her,” he said, staring at my daughter.

I could feel her physically recoil beside me, hardly able to believe that he was talking about her. She looked at me wide-eyed and didn’t speak, but grabbed my hand with her smaller sweaty one. I reassured her that it was OK. “There’s a seat next to me,” I told him.

No one else in the carriage spoke or even looked at us. He sat down very close next to me and proceeded to stare across at my daughter, craning to see round me. “What’s your name?” he asked. She didn’t reply.

“Pretty, pretty, pretty,” he said.

I told him quite clearly that she did not wish to speak to him and that I would like him to stop. Again, no one else said or did anything to help or support us.

For me, this was a first. The first time I had been out with my newly teenage daughter when she was sexually harassed. I felt ashamed about not knowing whether she had already been subjected to something like this before, when I was not with her, and I felt nervous to ask – she looked so fearful.

I also felt a sense of responsibility or fault. She had been late home from school, rushing to get changed and, as we left the house, I had grabbed a tailored jacket for her. It belonged to me and she wore it over a short, navy H&M dress, with socks and Doc Marten shoes. Her legs were bare. Maybe I should have taken a moment and insisted she wore tights? Or a longer skirt? Or trousers? So, already I was experiencing feelings of guilt and shame, and the harassment was not even aimed at me.

The incident also felt threatening and isolating. By now, we were four or five stops from our destination and my daughter had hold of my hand very tightly. I told the man we were going to move, but he got up himself and moved further down the carriage as a couple of seats had become vacant.

Now other passengers started to look up at us, one offering a tiny smile. Although the man had moved away, my daughter seemed to feel no safer and asked if we could leave the train before our stop and walk the rest of the way home, but we didn’t.

So we were both, in our own ways, caught in a position of feeling the need to alter our behaviour, either in practical ways, or through the internal dialogue with which we are saddled every day. Girls should dress differently. Or put up with the inconvenience of changing their travel plans. All in order to suit a culture that makes women feel bad about their own choices.

There's quite a bit more, but one passage really stood out to me:

Quote:

I want to tell my daughter that men are wonderful, supportive, as full of complexities and joy and love as women are. I am sure she knows this anyway. But I also see that she is beginning to experience alternative ways of imagining men – menacing ways.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandst...in-front-of-me

It's a peculiar experience, being harrassed as a young teen. It can be threatening, it can also make you feel grownup. Often it is a combination of the two. I doubt there are many women who have not experienced some form of harrassment as youngsters. This was a particularly extreme example, but I recall several experiences from when I was around 12 years old, that definitely made men seem a much more dangerous proposition.

It's funny how you learn to navigate it - like any other social landscape, it forms part of how you see the world. I don't mean that it warps you - just that the risk and danger is an ordinary part of the world you are in.

Men, of course, have their own ordinary dangers to which they become accustomed and which they naturally take into account and navigate. But I thought some of the guys in particular might find the insight into a particularly female experience of interest.

Here's a good one, The Thing All Women Do That You Don't Know About.

Quote:

There's this thing that happens whenever I speak about or write about women's issues. Things like dress codes, rape culture and sexism. I get the comments: Aren't there more important things to worry about? Is this really that big of a deal? Aren't you being overly sensitive? Are you sure you're being rational about this?

Every. Single. Time.

And every single time I get frustrated. Why don't they get it?

I think I've figured out why.

They don't know.

They don't know about de-escalation. Minimizing. Quietly acquiescing.

Hell, even though women live it, we are not always aware of it. But we have all done it.

We have all learned, either by instinct or by trial and error, how to minimize a situation that makes us uncomfortable. How to avoid angering a man or endangering ourselves. We have all, on many occasions, ignored an offensive comment. We've all laughed off an inappropriate come-on. We've all swallowed our anger when being belittled or condescended to.

It doesn't feel good. It feels icky. Dirty. But we do it because to not do it could put us in danger or get us fired or labeled a bitch. So we usually take the path of least precariousness.

It's not something we talk about every day. We don't tell our boyfriends and husbands and friends every time it happens. Because it is so frequent, so pervasive, that it has become something we just deal with.

So maybe they don't know.

I found myself out once with a group of older men I know reasonably well.
I wouldn't call them friends, but we know eachother's names and say Hello in the street, stop to pass the time of day.

One of the men can be quite... irascible.
He'd been challenged by someone on a committee he Chairs and was very grumpy. I was obvious he wanted to kick off.
Now they were drinking (albeit slowly), and I had a soft drink, but there was no hint of violence; they're all retired anyway, not the usual age range for brawling. But I could see that his snapping was bringing the group down and I wanted to stay out a little longer in the warm, the light, some company.

So I did my Princess Diana.
I smiled, paid him attention, lowered my eyes, listened. Slowly diverted his conversation by asking about things I know he likes and enjoys (his caravan FFS!)
It worked. He stopped being sarcastic, got off his high horse, joined in the usual banter.

It wasn't until afterwards I realised what I'd done.
I suppose I was being manipulative. After all I got what I wanted out of it. Another half hour or so stretching out a Diet Pepsi.

And yes, I did feel a bit icky afterwards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundae (Post 946651)

The irascible gent returned to a more equable frame of mind, the others had a negative influence removed from the evening's proceedings and you spent a little while longer in a relaxing atmosphere.

Manipulative? Nah. You poured oil on troubled waters and it didn't catch fire.

I'd enter that in the credit side of life's ledger. :thumb:

How can people still be aking these points ? This is only three years old.

And how is this still a thing?

Quote:

And how is this still a thing?

It isn't, but if Faux news keeps bringing it up, maybe the rare cretin out there will think they aren't alone, maybe there are others, maybe a movement, maybe I can me get a button or bumper sticker.

Faux wouldn't do that to avoid talking about real issues, would they? :yesnod:

Quote:

How can people still be making these points ? This is only three years old.

Number of people who attended the original speech (est.): 200

Number of viewers of the original speech clip on YouTube: about 10,000 (there are three of the original on Youtube, each with about 3,000 views)

Number of people who have watched this clip, criticizing the original clip: 377,000
Views of a similar criticism video that's 17 minutes long: 328,000

The outrage is now nearly self-feeding. In the near future we won't need the original clip.

The fair minded British were equal opportunity employers before it was cool. ;)

That looks so obscene. What makes it doubly horrible is that the man sitting there in that basket almost certainly subscribed to the view of women as the 'fairer sex' being weaker than men. That woman is not really a proper woman in his view. Not like the fair european women, epitomising civilisation with their grace and fragility. Her race and her class takes away from her humanity. If it didn't, then he'd be shamed by such a picture.

But, I came in here to post an article I just read in the Graudian (Guardian). Since this is the gender equality checkpoint, it's a good place to look at the big picture.

Quote:

A recent World Bank survey of 173 countries found that no fewer than 155 still had at least one law impeding women’s economic opportunities. Women face gender-based job restrictions in 100 countries, often confining them to low-paying activities, more often than not in the informal sector. In 18 countries the law gives husbands the right to prohibit their wives from working outside the home.

These legal differences have long-lasting economic and social consequences. Gender based job restrictions tend to be associated with wider wage gaps and lower employment rates for women. And where girls’ future earning potential is limited, families may choose to send their brothers to school instead.

-snip-

And it’s not just about the workplace. Women in several countries face extra documentation hurdles when trying to get a national identity card. Beyond making it tougher to access public services or contracts with others, no proof of ID means no chance of getting a bank loan to start or expand a business. Inheritance and marital property laws affect women’s access to financial institutions – access to property tends to make for greater equality within the household.

Now, those are some pretty shocking statistics, but they don't actually spell out the full reasons why this way of organising labour and resources is such a bad idea, particularly when it comes to female participation in the workplace. Not everybody believes that increased female participation in the workplace is a good idea. As evidenced by the recurring themes of working-mother shaming and latch-key kid panic in our media (particularly the conservative media) and the regular bemoaning of a by-gone age when women were wives and mothers first and everything else second, and touting the loss of that world as a corresponding threat to masculinity.

Setting aside questions of fairness - which are complicated by the degree to which an individual believes men and women are just fundamentally different, and that they should retain fundamentally distinct but complimentary roles within society and family - let's look just at the concrete benefits of greater gender equality:

Quote:

The economic cost of gender inequality is staggering. The McKinsey Global Institute recently estimated that if women participated in the economy identically to men, with equal wages and labour force participation, it would add up to $28tn to global GDP by 2025: a 26% increase over business as usual, equivalent to adding a new United States and China to the world economy.
A more modest scenario, under which countries match the gender parity progress of their best-performing regional neighbour, would add $12tn to the global economy – about the collective economic weight of Japan, Germany, and the UK.

The implications are no less revolutionary for individual households. Literate mothers have healthier children. When women earn an income, they spend a higher proportion of it than men do on their children’s health, education and nutrition.

Read the rest here:

http://www.theguardian.com/global-de...e-consequences

this thread shouldn't really be in politics or should it