Sexism: Still A Problem?

[ImNotOkay]

Sexism has been a really big problems including for people who are having a hard time.For me my parents would tell me girls are kind, quite, shy,etc

and that kinda made me mad, they try to keep me away from anything that in general is for boys not tomboys.Of course during this time it limited what i think i can do and what in reality i can do . For now many people are sexist and its actually pretty sad.But if you think about it sexism is kinda like how people think of gays,lesbians,and many sterotype.People say sexism don't exist anymore it long past, although if you open your eyes and observe for a little while you may tell some people are sexism with out even knowing.

[Swiftla]

In my opinion, all of the -isms (racism, sexism, ageism, ect.) will always be problems. As much as society has been working to build equality and peace over the past century, there is still a long way to go. Discrimination will probably always exist.

Specifically relating to sexism, it is certainly still prevalent. Women only gained the right to vote within the last century, and while we have come a long way since then, I think it's laughable that people believe that sexism can be eradicated that quickly. Sure, sexism can go both ways and sure, the extremist views of both sides (chauvinists and radical feminists) exist as well. Sexism against females is still an overwhelming majority, especially in third-world countries where some women are given no rights at all compared to their male counterparts.

It is certainly a better situation in first-world countries like Canada and the States. Though it is my belief that while it's a better situation, when looking at employment opportunities and overall treatment, sexism is more common against females than males.

[missy20201]

The way I see it, it depends on where you live and what definition you give to sexism. Generally, in the US, women are treated more favorably. On average, they're given shorter jailing sentences, win more cases for custody of children, are given scholarships for colleges based on gender, have tons of shelters, have tons of medical people working towards breast cancer (which, yes, affects men, but not as often) with little research towards prostate cancer, have the right to abort a child or put them up for adoption without contacting the father, are believed about assault cases far more often than men (in fact, many people still believe that it's impossible for a man to get sexually assaulted by a woman, and the law makes it very difficult to get a good case against a woman) - the list goes on. Yes, many people still view women as being more 'fragile' but many other people know that isn't the case, and those that think otherwise are not out actively trying to keep women from the jobs they want etc.

As for the wage gap, it's simply not that. It's an earnings gap, yes, but wages are the same. Why would a business owner take the time to calculate how much less money to give to their female workers than the males - and on that line, why not just hire all women, if you can pay them less? No, the answer is simple. Women tend to go into safer jobs (how many female coal miners or steel workers do you see? Not many), jobs with less/more flexible hours, take time off for children more than men, and start working later in their lives. So, yes, when you compare yearly earnings of women to men, it makes sense than men would earn more. It isn't sexism on part of the bosses. I can say I just started a job and I earn the same amount of money at the end of two weeks that my male coworkers earn, if we work about the same number of hours within that time.

On top of all that, it's clear that men are looked down on by the majority of women in the US. MRA meetings have been shut down by third wave feminists, shelters for abused men are either under/unfunded, or protested enough to never take off in the first place. Men are attacked for everything they do, from greeting someone on the street to sitting with their legs a few inches too far apart. If a man looks at a magazine with scantily clad women he's called a pig, but when women watch movies like Magic Mike everyone giggles about how hot the actors are. If a woman slaps a man for making her angry, it's viewed as empowering. If a man slaps a woman for making him angry, he's a crazy abuser that needs to be put away. (Of course, slapping anyone for your anger is gross and wrong, but men aren't even allowed to hit a woman in self defense if she hit first, c'mon.) It's a total double standard everywhere now, and it's ridiculous.

In the end, in the US, there seem to be some rare people who genuinely think less of women, and a larger number that think they should be equal but are weaker, which sucks, but does little to actually impede women. In my opinion, the opposite extreme has started up among the younger generation (of which I am a part of) that tends to look down on and blame men for every problem there is today. So no, as far as I see it, sexism against women isn't a problem in the US anymore.

[Intempestivity]

As for the wage gap, it's simply not that. It's an earnings gap, yes, but wages are the same. Why would a business owner take the time to calculate how much less money to give to their female workers than the males - and on that line, why not just hire all women, if you can pay them less? No, the answer is simple. Women tend to go into safer jobs (how many female coal miners or steel workers do you see? Not many), jobs with less/more flexible hours, take time off for children more than men, and start working later in their lives. So, yes, when you compare yearly earnings of women to men, it makes sense than men would earn more. It isn't sexism on part of the bosses. I can say I just started a job and I earn the same amount of money at the end of two weeks that my male coworkers earn, if we work about the same number of hours within that time.

You say you just started a job--just out of curiosity, are you in an entry level position? The wage gap becomes prevelant the further up the chain you go and the longer you have been in a particular role. Men will get promotions more often then women. They may start at approximately the same wage, but in five year's time, they will be in different places.

Did you know that the US is pretty much the only Western country that doesn't offer paid maternity leave, so women are forced to earn nothing when they decide to have a family in the states? How about the fact that even in countries where women get paid maternity leave, they still often end up earning less than their husbands and therefore often have to be the ones to sacrifice their jobs if the family can't find affordable child care? Often times, the cost of weekly child care just about matches what a woman would make in her job, anyway, so it makes more sense for her to stop earning money and stay at home--even if that's not necessarily what she wants to do.

Additionally, when women return to work from time off having children, they are treated as lesser than their male counterparts. I knew a few women who had approximately 6 months off when they had children, and when they came back to work, they all said that their career had been set back the equivalent of 2-3 years, not six months. They were treated differently by their male bosses.

Along those lines, sexism in the workplace is particularly prevelant in the corporate world. In my previous place of employment, I heard men claiming that women prefer part time hours and will happily settle for less pay so they can have kids. Never did I hear a woman actually say this--in fact, all of the women I knew who had kids talked about how incredibly difficult it was to get the career they wanted to have after choosing to have children, because they were treated differently. I also heard men say that all women care about is hair and makeup and bags and shoes, that they only work to afford those four things. Several women I worked with were asked "who's dick did you suck to get that job, then" when they got promoted. And one particular gem was when a bunch of male managers had a lunch meeting and were bashing all of their female counterparts--declaring that they were "bitches" who "don't know their place".

You mentioned you're part of a younger generation, and maybe you're too young to have actually experienced this sort of ingrained sexism. But as you get older and as you try to break through the corporate world (assuming you're not planning on being an artist or musician or running your own business), you'll start to see it more and more. Men who ask the first woman to walk in to a meeting room to make them all a coffee, even though they've all been sat there for five or ten minutes. Men who direct all of their questions to your male counterparts and ignore what you have to say. Men who treat you like you're an absolute idiot just beause you happen to wear make up. Men who call you a bitch who doesn't know her place behind your back. Because your place isn't in management. It's not being successful in a career and making as much money as them. No. Your place is in the kitchen, with your babies. That's what these types of men think.

Not all men, no. Of course not all men. But there's a fair few men who think and act exactly that way, and the more you're in the working world, the more you see it.

[Tekla]

win more cases for custody of children

This isn't necessarily for favoritism/sexist reasons, though. This explains some of the reasons women get custody more often for non-sexist reasons (at least, they're not sexist to me).

On top of all that, it's clear that men are looked down on by the majority of women in the US. MRA meetings have been shut down by third wave feminists, shelters for abused men are either under/unfunded, or protested enough to never take off in the first place. Men are attacked for everything they do, from greeting someone on the street to sitting with their legs a few inches too far apart. If a man looks at a magazine with scantily clad women he's called a pig, but when women watch movies like Magic Mike everyone giggles about how hot the actors are. If a woman slaps a man for making her angry, it's viewed as empowering. If a man slaps a woman for making him angry, he's a crazy abuser that needs to be put away. (Of course, slapping anyone for your anger is gross and wrong, but men aren't even allowed to hit a woman in self defense if she hit first, c'mon.) It's a total double standard everywhere now, and it's ridiculous.

MRAs can be quite disturbingly misogynistic. :/

Men do have it legitimately more difficult in some areas, I'm not denying that, and there are ridiculous double standards. I strongly agree that men should be equal. But that does not ever make it okay for men to hurt women in their quest for equality or to try and take away still very necessary protections for women, children, and others, especially in parts of the world where women already have it worse off than women in western countries (India comes to mind).

[missy20201]

@Intempestivity

You raise many valid points (which are unfortunate for the world around us).

You've got me there - I just started a minimum wage job where three of my four managers, including the head manager, are women, and most of the workers are elderly women, early twenties men, and high schoolers. It's usually a very relaxed environment, and the guys are usually (affectionately) picked on while the girls are called hard-working. A very different experience from what many people describe, so you can understand my doubt towards the awful situations some people propose. That isn't to say it doesn't happen, of course. I just find it hard to believe that a majority of women find men treating them terribly at office jobs etc these days. Once again, though, I haven't the experience to say either way.

And yes, I did know that we're basically the only Western country that doesn't offer paid maternity leave, which is really stupid, and I would personally advocate for it (even though I can't stand kids and am not planning on having any in the foreseeable future - which isn't a problem since I'm gay, but off topic ). I'm also very sorry that your friends had that experience. That was a crappy thing for their coworkers/employers to do

I do understand what you're saying. There is some bias, at the very least, in the corporate world. In the articles I've read debunking the wage gap, they always say that factoring in everything I mentioned brings the disparity down to 'almost zero' so there is still a bit of leeway there. Still, I believe the true answer, at the moment, is some sort of compromise. It's no lie that jobs such as office positions and dangerous/mundane but necessary ones like garbage collectors and electricians are male-dominated, and these tend to pay more for their strain (by hours or physical labor). And jobs that are generally easier on hours and physical strain, and so pay less, like teaching and psychology, are female-dominated. There is some measure of discrimination. But that isn't the whole thing, not by a long shot.


@Tekla

I do agree with that article, to at least most of a degree. I suppose it's more court/judge bias than the fault of the law at this point. I've known many men that had the money and desire to keep their children, and a couple where the mother wasn't a caring kind of person or had bad habits that could possibly endanger the child - and they still struggled/failed to get custody of their children. The popular reasoning tends to be 'well women are nurturing so children need their mothers'. It's a stigma that I dislike, because fathers can be plenty nurturing. I guess I just wish it were easier for the proper primary caregiver to be identified.

Oh gosh, yeah - I know how some MRAs can be. Even egalitarians aren't a shining beacon of hope anymore. I feel like any movement in particular isn't the best.

And I don't know how I came off, but I definitely don't mean that women should be put down to bring men up! :0 No one should be, in my opinion (which is part of the reason why feminism and men's rights movements will never be a golden ticket - both of them focus on the one and largely disregard the other). I just mean that the popular trend has been moving from 'women are useless' to 'women are awesome but f*** men', which is concerning. I really just want everyone to be equal ;v;

[Tekla]

@Tekla

I do agree with that article, to at least most of a degree. I suppose it's more court/judge bias than the fault of the law at this point. I've known many men that had the money and desire to keep their children, and a couple where the mother wasn't a caring kind of person or had bad habits that could possibly endanger the child - and they still struggled/failed to get custody of their children. The popular reasoning tends to be 'well women are nurturing so children need their mothers'. It's a stigma that I dislike, because fathers can be plenty nurturing. I guess I just wish it were easier for the proper primary caregiver to be identified.

Oh gosh, yeah - I know how some MRAs can be. Even egalitarians aren't a shining beacon of hope anymore. I feel like any movement in particular isn't the best.

And I don't know how I came off, but I definitely don't mean that women should be put down to bring men up! :0 No one should be, in my opinion (which is part of the reason why feminism and men's rights movements will never be a golden ticket - both of them focus on the one and largely disregard the other). I just mean that the popular trend has been moving from 'women are useless' to 'women are awesome but f*** men', which is concerning. I really just want everyone to be equal ;v;

Unfortunately many men aren't nurturing, or they are loathe to show it (this is how those awful outdated gender stereotypes have ultimately hurt men). :/ My dad is one of those people, and mom/me/brother are always the ones pulling the weight in this relationship. After my mom kicked my dad out for borderline alcoholism when I was very young, my dad only visited intermittently and it was a challenge getting him to pay child support. He had (and still has) a difficult time keeping down the same job for an extended period of time, and every time we went up to spend a weekend with him he was in a different place. And I've heard terrible things about all kinds of men who skip out on their kids or refuse to pay child support entirely. So...I don't know. Maybe I'm not the best one to speak from this viewpoint...but I know I wouldn't have wanted to live with my dad, and the stories about so many men outright failing their children - I can understand why the courts favor women, even if it isn't fair.

I think the MRAs probably started out with good intentions and some of them still do, but the ones like those in the articles I linked kind of destroyed their credibility. x.x

That, and I think a lot of people look at the name - "men's rights activisits" - and kind of blink, because in many societies even in the modern age of today men have generally more rights than women. This tends to be more prevalent in less developed areas of the world, like India, but the fact that it still exists at all really undermines the idea of "men's rights activism" because in the viewpoints of many, men have never had fewer rights or needed special protections. They could - and should - have chosen a better name under which to organize.

Ah, you didn't come off wrong ;m; I just see it differently, and the MRA meeting shutdown thing stuck out to me because of how awful those types of men can be and how that kind of mindset actually seems to be becoming more prevalent to me. It's not fair (or productive...) to counter misogyny with misandry, but I can also understand why women react the way they do sometimes - like when men (and also women) feel like it's acceptable to call women sluts or whores for looking at porn or having multiple sex partners, when men in the same position have rarely if ever been subject to that kind of terrible behaviour. I can understand why women would become distrustful and wary, because those outdated and ugly mindsets that say women should be chained in the kitchen with a baby still exist. :c

[Intempestivity]

You've got me there - I just started a minimum wage job where three of my four managers, including the head manager, are women, and most of the workers are elderly women, early twenties men, and high schoolers. It's usually a very relaxed environment, and the guys are usually (affectionately) picked on while the girls are called hard-working. A very different experience from what many people describe, so you can understand my doubt towards the awful situations some people propose. That isn't to say it doesn't happen, of course. I just find it hard to believe that a majority of women find men treating them terribly at office jobs etc these days. Once again, though, I haven't the experience to say either way.

Why are you basing your opinion solely off of your experience, particularly since your individual experience is relatively unique and not representative of the norm? If a majority of women are saying that they are treated terribly at office jobs and in the corporate world, surely their voices would add up to something? Of course it's not every man in the business world who acts this way, and it's not every business that does it. One can never make sweeping generalisations. But in my experience, and in the experience of many other women, it does happen pretty regularly.

Personally, I had a fairly progressive male boss with my previous employer, but even he called our team a "honeypot" because at one point we were a team of women. He didn't realise that that was slightly offensive until it was pointed out to him. He also apologised to me about six months after I started because he admitted that he'd made snap judgements about me due to my hair colour and the way I'd painted my nails. I didn't fit his idea of a "professional" woman--neutral hair, neutral nails, neutral make up--and he wrote me off initially. It was only after consistently proving myself to him to be above and beyond my colleagues that he realised he'd judged me based on a narrow view of what was to him an acceptable vision of being a female in a workplace. To be fair, he recognised his mistake and apologised to me for it--but it should have never happened in the first place.

Despite having a progressive boss, I had many, many other men in business treat me like dirt because I am a woman. I don't know if it's because I am a woman in a technical field, or just because I am a woman, but I've had men baby-talk to me when explaining their technical requirements, men purposely talk about how a piece of work I did was "getting them excited and aroused" (ew), men completely ignore me and direct their questions to my boss--who would try to redirect them back to me saying that I was the expert, not him--and they would ignore his redirection and ask him the same question again. They treat women differently to how they treat men. They would never think of baby-talking another man, using innuendos with another man while discussing business or completely ignore a man when told that man was an expert in his field.

My situation is not unique. It is the norm.

And yes, I did know that we're basically the only Western country that doesn't offer paid maternity leave, which is really stupid, and I would personally advocate for it (even though I can't stand kids and am not planning on having any in the foreseeable future - which isn't a problem since I'm gay, but off topic ). I'm also very sorry that your friends had that experience. That was a crappy thing for their coworkers/employers to do

I do understand what you're saying. There is some bias, at the very least, in the corporate world. In the articles I've read debunking the wage gap, they always say that factoring in everything I mentioned brings the disparity down to 'almost zero' so there is still a bit of leeway there.

The thing is, if women are not paid for maternity leave and are being paid less so they are forced to choose to sacrifice their career to raise children, you can't really say that these are their preference, as you suggested in your earlier post, and that the reason men earn more "makes sense". It doesn't--men earn more because women aren't being paid when they have to briefly take a step back from work to have children. That is discrimination. Men earn more because they get more promotions then women do. That is discrimination. Women often get stuck in a career rut, particularly if they decide to have a family. Men don't. That is discrimination.

Additionally, it's not necessarily that women don't want to go in to more physical work--it may be that there's a bias by the manager to hire men, because men are viewed as being more physically capable for hard labour. You can look at current levels of employment, but without comparing them to the applicant pools--pre-interview, pre-hire, straight up CVs and job application stage--you can't definitively say that men tend to go for harder physical jobs that pay more. All you can say is that men get hired for physical jobs that pay more--that doesn't mean that women didn't apply for them, too. Women just didn't get hired. And that could likely be a direct result of bias towards men for those jobs.

[Kestrad]

As for the wage gap, it's simply not that. It's an earnings gap, yes, but wages are the same. Why would a business owner take the time to calculate how much less money to give to their female workers than the males - and on that line, why not just hire all women, if you can pay them less? No, the answer is simple. Women tend to go into safer jobs (how many female coal miners or steel workers do you see? Not many), jobs with less/more flexible hours, take time off for children more than men, and start working later in their lives. So, yes, when you compare yearly earnings of women to men, it makes sense than men would earn more. It isn't sexism on part of the bosses. I can say I just started a job and I earn the same amount of money at the end of two weeks that my male coworkers earn, if we work about the same number of hours within that time.

Tekla and Intempestivity have covered most of the points I would have wanted to make, but I feel the need to add that a bunch of the highest paying career options right now are in extremely male-dominated fields - software, engineering, etc. All of which happen to be fields that women are heavily discouraged from entering. Not because they're less competent at these things, but because people just assume that men are better, and therefore men (and boys) are just given more opportunities in general to learn and enter those fields. A far larger percentage of women enter college never having learned anything about programming or engineering than men, or even having considered it as an option, making them disadvantaged from the start, and then the ones who do choose to study that field face lots of microagressions where professors and managers just assume that their male classmates and colleagues are more competent. Those women who do manage to enter the field professionally then tend to get phased into the "more social" jobs rather than the technical ones, which are where all the eventual management options are.

Basically even when no one is actively trying to discriminate against women, small ingrained ideas about what women or men are "supposed" to be like have a big effect down the road. Sexism will be over when those preconceptions are eradicated. That is to say, it'll still be a long, long time before sexism isn't a problem anymore.

[Intempestivity]

Tekla and Intempestivity have covered most of the points I would have wanted to make, but I feel the need to add that a bunch of the highest paying career options right now are in extremely male-dominated fields - software, engineering, etc. All of which happen to be fields that women are heavily discouraged from entering. Not because they're less competent at these things, but because people just assume that men are better, and therefore men (and boys) are just given more opportunities in general to learn and enter those fields. A far larger percentage of women enter college never having learned anything about programming or engineering than men, or even having considered it as an option, making them disadvantaged from the start, and then the ones who do choose to study that field face lots of microagressions where professors and managers just assume that their male classmates and colleagues are more competent. Those women who do manage to enter the field professionally then tend to get phased into the "more social" jobs rather than the technical ones, which are where all the eventual management options are.

Yes. STEM fields are among the highest paying, and girls/women are often discouraged from pursuing interests in STEM. Not even necessarily actively (although that happens, too), but by the way ingrained sexism starts from birth. Boys/men are supposed to do the science, techy, loud, explosive things. Girls are supposed to be neat and tidy and quiet and unobtrusive.

This video https://youtu.be/XP3cyRRAfX0 is a pretty excellent way of showing how a girl's interest in STEM fields can easily be eroded by a series of simple comments around her behaviour that stifle her exploration and curiosity.

Even girls who are lucky enough to have parents that encourage that curiosity face a LOT of stigma and and hidden hostility (I love the term microaggression, by the way--describes it perfectly) when they grow up and have to deal with the men in STEM fields. I work in a technical field, and I get a lot of sexist behaviour from several men that I work with. Sometimes it's ignorance, othertimes it's downright hostile. I have to fight twice as hard as my male colleagues to prove that I'm capable, and if I point out that something someone said is offensive, I'm an uptight bitch. If I don't fight back, then I'm silently agreeing with their warped opinions. Either way, they view me as lesser than.

Edit: I just found this little clip regarding the wage gap in American Soccer (there's a transcript underneath if you can't view the video).

Also, Here's a great article around the myths and facts concerning the wage gap. I'd like to draw your attention to the second fact, labelled "FACT: After Accounting For All Other Factors, Women Still Earn Less Than Men For The Same Work". Independent studies have found that "Women’s median earnings are lower than men’s in nearly all occupations, whether they work in occupations predominantly done by women, occupations predominantly done by men, or occupations with a more even mix of men and women."; "According to an April 2015 analysis of hourly earnings in 2014 from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), men out-earn women 'across the wage distribution.' According to EPI, men and women at the lowest end of the income scale are far closer to pay parity than at higher incomes, a phenomenon for which “the minimum wage is partially responsible” because 'it sets a wage floor that applies to everyone" and "Women, for example, are now better educated than men, have nearly as much work experience and are equally likely to pursue many high-paying careers. No longer can the gap be dismissed with pat observations that women outnumber men in lower-paying jobs like teaching and social work. ... In fact, another study shows, when women enter fields in greater numbers, pay declines -- for the very same jobs that more men were doing before."

Women do completely earn less money--significantly less, in the case of national sports teams--than their male counterparts for the exact same job. They also have to work harder for the recognition they deserve and back up their work with facts and figures.

The wage gap is real, and it is not because women "choose to earn less".