this is female privilege

Female privilege is pretending feminism has never had any influence on the government in an attempt to emphasize your supposed oppression, then when someone points out ways in which feminism has influenced the government, back-pedaling by saying those are rights that men have had for years and women should've had all along anyway and not having everyone in the world call you out on your bullshit.

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:09:55 -0400

I’ve always been confused by the lack of celebration in social justice. People are always so ready to deny or lament their success.

As with me, it should be a good thing that I personally do not face oppression due to my gender. Yet I recall being called a bigoted MRA-apologist for feeling this way. If a woman dare not feel oppressed, the SJ-squad will come in to make sure they do.

- B

Isn't that pretty much the crux of SJW arguments, that men's problems can't be discussed because women have it worse? That a problem suddenly vanishes because a worse one happens to exist?

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:05:55 -0400

If you’re talking about men’s issues, yes, but if you’re talking about men’s issues, bringing up situations where other people have it worse is ‘silencing’ or ‘de-railing’.

People are always going to have it worse than you, using this as either an excuse to dismiss someone else’s issues or a footing for your own unrelated issues, is unacceptable.

- B

two-thirds of the world's illiterate are women

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:58:03 -0400

windupgirlchronicle:

tell me more about female privilege

Because this 1 point basically eliminates any advantages women can have in different societies?

Based on this logic, I could use an arbitrary statistic, like men make up 98% of workplace and military deaths in the US and say there must be no such thing as male privilege. You’ve taken a global problem that needs to be addressed, and used this as a footing to deny your own advantages. That doesn’t work.

Thought I would clear something up concerning the "slut power" post conflicting with being against the media sexualizing women. The anti-slut shaming movement is about women being able to have control of their own bodies, i.e. not being shamed by others for dressing how they want or having casual sex. Why most rational feminists are against the media is not because women are shown in risque clothing, but because women are dressed this way solely for men’s pleasure. (cont)

Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:36:52 -0400

Granted, you could argue that there are “sexy” men in the media as well, but you really can’t be naive enough to say that men are sexualized and objectified nearly as much as women in the media. When women say they don’t like other women being sexualized in the media, they mean they don’t like to see a woman’s worth only having to do with how she looks and how she’s dressed. When women are “sexualized,” their only value comes from their appearance. Not in what they say or do. (cont) The “slut power” movement is basically saying a woman shouldn’t be judged for making her own choices about the way she lives her life. Sexualization of women in the media doesn’t give the sexualized woman many choices at all (esp. since so often sexualized women in the media are seen in a submissive state, since that’s what’s “hot” or whatever). Do you understand how the two don’t conflict now, or do you need me to explain it better?

The sexualisation of women is hardly purely for the pleasure of men. You think all those saucy women in Cosmo are for men? Women objectify other women just as much as men do. Sex sells, regardless of gender.

And you didn’t really need to explain anything in the first place. I do get it, I get the point that what you do with your own body is a choice, yet in the media it is somewhat forced. But at the same time, people tend to forget that those women on billboards are real people. They are a woman, and they made a choice to use their image in that way. They didn’t have to accept that job, and I hardly think they went into it aiming to please men, it was to make money. Either way, if you put 2 scantily clad women side by side, one dressing solely for men and one dressing solely for herself, unless you’re a mind reader, you can’t tell the difference. That’s where the mixed messages come in. If you emulate the images seen in the media, people can’t tell if you’re doing because you feel comfortable that way, or if you’re out to impress. I fully support female sexuality and dressing how you feel comfortable, but using exaggeration to make this point only reduces women to their bodies more.

- B

I thought about this not long ago. Not just feminists, but women...

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:38:48 -0400

I thought about this not long ago. Not just feminists, but women in general having the attitude that everyone else needs to stop over-sexualising women, except for them. The reason people are so against this over-sexualisation in the media is because it is unrealistic, it is tokenistic, it is shallow and objectifying. Wouldn’t you think that emulating this image in real life would support the corporations use of this image for women? If the female figure is nothing to hide or be ashamed of, then why are you so ashamed of the half naked woman in that video clip? Shouldn’t you be proud that the female form is so loved and accepted that you can make money from it?

Oh I forgot, only ‘real’ women can be proud of their bodies.

raucouscaucus: given that less than 4% of all rape accusations are false, and only about 3% of rape...

Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:26:08 -0400

raucouscaucus:

given that less than 4% of all rape accusations are false, and only about 3% of rape accusations end with the accused arrested, i think rape is actually a way bigger problem than false rape accusations

It’s funny how when people pull out seemingly random/low statistics describing the arrest or conviction rate of rape accusations, they take the assumption that every accusation is true.

Rape is the only crime where it is expected that the accused is guilty until proven innocent.

Reading a thread about wedding clichés, and it’s really appalling how much of the jibs are at...

Sat, 15 Jun 2013 20:59:10 -0400

Reading a thread about wedding clichés, and it’s really appalling how much of the jibs are at the man’s expense.

At his own wedding, a man is painted as a loser lucky to even be getting married. Like the bride is somehow taking pity on him, such a beautiful generous soul willing to settle for a slob like him. Like it’s unheard of for a woman to actually love a man.

If anyone comes out with any of this trash at my wedding, they will be out so bloody quick.

thoughts on this?

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:02:53 -0400

thoughts on this?:

this is from heroinfriday’s blog and it has some links. the links are about feminists who are against men peeing while standing.

[Note from B] I don’t even want to entertain the idea with my thoughts. I have no thoughts, because it’s a joke. Men peeing while standing is an issue, yet men’s mental health and parental rights is ‘de-railing’ or ‘mansplaining’?

You all know I’m not in the business of calling people’s opinions stupid but…….. this peeing critique is just plain stupid.

sehboofs: that one time a guy from my school was sent home for wearing a skirt and everyone wore...

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:05:40 -0400

sehboofs:

that one time a guy from my school was sent home for wearing a skirt and everyone wore skirts as a protest the following school day

This gives me faith in younger generations :)

Female privilege is Julia Gillard playing the woman card to try and win votes in the upcoming...

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 20:32:45 -0400

Female privilege is Julia Gillard playing the woman card to try and win votes in the upcoming federal election, although during her term she has introduced legislation particularly hurtful to single mothers.

Female privilege is being able to hypocritically use your gender like this to try and get yourself ahead without any real substance.

Is Forced Fatherhood Fair?

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 20:19:25 -0400

Is Forced Fatherhood Fair?:

faisisteachas:

In cases of accidental pregnancy, men now arguably have less reproductive autonomy than women.

This weekend millions of Americans will happily celebrate the role that fathers play in their families. For some families, though — specifically those in which dad’s role was not freely assumed, but legally mandated — Father’s Day can be an emotionally complicated occasion. And that somewhat messy reality raises a question that is worth examining today as the very definition of parents and families continues to undergo legal and social transformation.

Women’s rights advocates have long struggled for motherhood to be a voluntary condition, and not one imposed by nature or culture. In places where women and girls have access to affordable and safe contraception and abortion services, and where there are programs to assist mothers in distress find foster or adoptive parents, voluntary motherhood is basically a reality. In many states, infant safe haven laws allow a birth mother to walk away from her newborn baby if she leaves it unharmed at a designated facility.

If a man accidentally conceives a child with a woman, and does not want to raise the child with her, what are his choices? Surprisingly, he has few options in the United States. He can urge her to seek an abortion, but ultimately that decision is hers to make. Should she decide to continue the pregnancy and raise the child, and should she or our government attempt to establish him as the legal father, he can be stuck with years of child support payments.

Do men now have less reproductive autonomy than women? Should men have more control over when and how they become parents, as many women now do?

The political philosopher Elizabeth Brake has argued that our policies should give men who accidentally impregnate a woman more options, and that feminists should oppose policies that make fatherhood compulsory. In a 2005 article in the Journal of Applied Philosophy she wrote, “if women’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a fetus, then men’s partial responsibility for pregnancy does not obligate them to support a resulting child.” At most, according to Brake, men should be responsible for helping with the medical expenses and other costs of a pregnancy for which they are partly responsible.

Made rebloggable by request

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:44:36 -0400

Made rebloggable by request

My opinions and views change as I read more things. Is it weird that I agree with what this blog says and what other...let's say..."traditional" social justice blogs say too?

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:02:08 -0400

No, it’s not weird. I don’t tend to uniformly agree with any one blog or article I read. There will be bits I do agree with, and bits I don’t. I think being able to objectively synthesise information from different sources is a good sign that you’re going to have a balanced opinion.

- B

Gender Equity in the Australian Workforce and it's Implications for Education and Society

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 21:55:00 -0400

As I mentioned many weeks ago now, I was writing a brief research paper as titled above. The aim of the assignment was to critically engage with a social equity issue, synthesising many points of view to draw implications for Australian society and teachers. Although part of the aim was to present an un-bias array of opinions, I did take a particular focus on the nature of masculinity in my implications. I ended up receiving a distinction for it. I thought it would be relevant to your interests.

Introduction

Gender equity is undoubtedly a precarious issue in modern society. The general world order privileges men and disadvantages women, yet this basic fact masks the complexities of gender equity issues in a western society (Connell 2009). “Traditional ‘gender roles’ no longer look the same, mean the same or feel the same” (Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007 p.1). With this change has come a surge of issues surrounding our understanding of what we believe gender to implicate. How do our understandings of masculinities and femininities reproduce or transform gender inequities in our society? The following report will explore this idea through a discussion of the gendered workforce of Australia. A series of professional and personal implications will then suggest how educators can take action in regards to contributing to a more equitable society for all genders.

Equity in the Workforce
Positions of Power

It is frequently noted that women are underrepresented in positions of political power and corporate authority in western societies, including Australia (ABS 2013; Bryson 2000; Connell 2005; Connell 2009; Vickers 2010). This is unlikely a new concept to the majority of Australians, leaving them with the question as to why. Anti-discrimination legislation has recently been consolidated to further protect people regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity (AGD 2011). With such policy and law in place supporting equitable opportunities for all genders, inequities among the political and corporate elite can be boiled down to a disconnect between policy and historical norms (Connell 2005; Connell 2009; Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). This has lead to the ‘glass ceiling’ argument; that although women are increasingly represented in middle management roles, their opportunities for advancement are diverted (Connell 2009). However, it has been contested that these divergences from positions of power are less due to a ‘glass ceiling’ and more due to career choices or other social factors (Zeng 2009). Women are more likely to move between organisations or opt for jobs with lower responsibilities. Their ability to make such choices has raised the question of how we as a society define ‘power’ to begin with.

Warren Farrell’s sentimental and controversial book The Myth of Male Power suggests that “real power does not come from caving into pressure to expand obligations; it comes from controlling our own life” (1993 p.35). The implication is that the absence of women from positions of institutional power is a reflection of their autonomy. Australian women often sideline their career for personal commitments, Julia Gillard herself being an example of how family life (or lack thereof) impacts the opportunities for women in this country (Connell 2009; Vickers 2010). Is this due to patriarchal structures creating an environment in which women cannot progress (Connell 2005; Connell 2009), or is this empowering women through a re-structured economy enticing women to ‘have it all’ (Connell 2005; Mundy 2012)?

The Middle-Class Workforce

The ABS (2013) notes that the gender gap is greatest at the highest institutional levels, a level hardly reflective of the average population. These institutions of power are linked to a ‘mainstream masculinity’ that does not necessarily encompass the careers of men as a gender (Connell 2005). The wage gap debate paints an image of the role of gender in contemporary workforces. When looking at mean scores in Australia, females earn 11% less than males, however, this score is skewed by those at the ‘highest institutional levels’ mentioned previously. When looking at median scores the gap is reduced to 7% (ABS 2013). Yet it has been argued that this does not account for the large portion of women in part time and casual work, which puts women far below men in terms of total earnings (Todd & Preston 2012). The existence of the wage gap sheds light on the work valued in our economy. To be put simply, industries and conditions deemed to be ‘feminine’, such as care, education and part-time employment, are undervalued in our society (Connell 2009; Bryson 2000). Within this, men are more likely to submit to a criterion that pays higher, such as longer hours/overtime, extensive travel and poorer working conditions (Farrell 2005). This gendered division of labour is a common and historically embedded issue in many industries (Connell 2009).

The presence of women (and mothers) in the labour force is on the increase (ABS 2013; Mundy 2012), leading to distinctive gendered constructs within economic transformation. Middle-class men have often been perceived as the ‘bearers of skill’, dominating fields of labour and trade (Connell 2005; Todd & Preston 2012; Vickers 2010). Due to the decline in these industries and the rise of technology some commentators say that western economies are becoming ‘feminised’ (Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). Australia’s dramatic shift from an agricultural to a service economy reflects this transformation, although advantaging the female dominated service and care sectors, particularly disadvantages young women (ABS 2013; Welch 2010; Vickers 2010). Considering women dominate 3 of the 5 largest industries in Australia, it is no surprise that flexible workplace organisation, childcare and engaging men in unpaid work is increasingly on the political agenda (ABS 2013; Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). This demonstrates the strong connection between the gendered workforce, and gender relations.

Gender Relations and Expectations

The gendered divisions of labour and power in Australia can be less attributed to discrimination and more closely linked to our constructs of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’. “People construct themselves as masculine or feminine. We claim a place in the gender order” (Connell 2009 p.6). Due to these constructs, it has become expected that men adhere to a ‘mainstream masculinity’ associated with power while women adhere to a ‘mainstream femininity’ associated with passivity. When we view gender in this way as an ‘institutional arrangement’ it is evident that gender disparity in positions of power is only the tip of the iceberg (Connell 2005). Although the Australian workforce has changed, our gender expectations have not, thus leadings to the gendered workforce we see today. Mundy (2012 p.14) suggests “there remains a vestigial sense that a man needs to bring something to the table besides dinner”, articulating this disconnect between political agenda and gender expectations. ABS statistics seem to reflect this sentiment that in Australia there is an expectation for men to increase their participation in unpaid work without surrendering their time in the workforce (ABS 2013). Our unshifting ideas surrounding gender roles ignores the other sociological factors that are much more likely to impact our success (Collins et al. 2000; Vickers 2010).

Society takes the gender dichotomy for granted. Traditionally, our genders were defined by our physiology, yet it has become evident that this is intertwined with a social and psychological identity construct (Connell 2009). How we experience gender is then impacted by our culture, sexuality, status, location and even physical abilities (Connell 2005; Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007; Vickers 2010). ‘Intersectionality’ is the term used to describe this perspective; that everyone’s experience of gender is unique (Sheilds 2008). Intersections create both opportunity and oppression, and as shown by various studies and statistics, these intersections have a more profound impact on our success in education and the workplace than gender alone (ABS 2013; Collins et al. 2000; Sheilds 2008; Vickers 2010). Understanding intersectionality has become a focus in modern feminism and should become a focus when transforming our perceptions of gender.

Personal and Professional Action

When addressing gender inequities in Australian society, we must challenge our own perceptions. Gender equity in the world of education is particularly complex. Although we are yet to see this effectively translated to the labour force, girls are typically outperforming boys in educational domains in many westernised societies (Keddie2006; Vialle, Thompson & Clark 2008; Vickers 2010). As educators and members of society we must support equity both in and out of the classroom in a way that will encourage an equitable future workforce.

Challenging Perceptions

As stated previously, society takes the gender dichotomy for granted. It is crucial for educators to understand how gender is constructed in Australian society to be able to challenge dominant concepts of masculinity and femininity, not just in schools, but their community (Keddie 2006; MCEETYA 1997; Murphy 2008). The media is a key player in the construction of gender in this country, particularly in the realm of sport (Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). Becoming critical of these constructs will then allow for personal change as the basis for political and cultural action. However, it is not enough to re-define our perceptions of ‘masculinity’ and/or ‘femininity’ in isolation, as Bryson (2000 p.7) highlights, “the increased perception that ‘real men’ can change nappies and collect their children from school can have little practical effect if conditions of employment require them to work 50 hours a week and if caring for others represents a route into poverty rather than economic independence”. It is a pointless practice to push against gender roles if nothing about the discourses change, as such, our re-definitions of these constructs must accommodate what we aim for future family and work discourses to entail (Connell 2005; Vickers 2010).

Valuing traditional, ‘masculine’, 45 hour per week workplaces and their encompassing male-dominant discourses re-enforces gender segregation detrimental to both men and women (Bryson 2000). Opposing segregation requires a demand to change the institutional structure in which this segregation occurs (Connell 2005). As participants in this structure, this begins with eliminating the stigma associated with moving outside the gender binary and equitably valuing what we currently deem to be ‘feminine’ workplaces (Bryson 2000; Connell 2005). As educators, we have the opportunity to address this not only through adjusting our perceptions, but through professional practice in the classroom.

Transformative Pedagogies

Australia’s gender equity achievements in education to date have not translated to the transformation of workplaces, failing to equip students with the skills necessary to overcome ‘post-school barriers’ to equity (MCEETYA 1997; Vickers 2010.) It has been critiqued that action in the past has caused schools to become ‘feminised’ spaces, ignoring the intersectionality of girls while disengaging boys with education (Ailwood 2003; Keddie 2006; Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). Educators have the opportunity to implement transformative practices that foster equitable relationships with all students while valuing the unique traits that all genders bring to the classroom.

Teacher expectations undoubtedly shape how students experience education. Simplistic understandings of gender have influenced these expectations, marking the relationships, programs and assessment born from them (Eilwood 2008; Keddie 2006). Boys are often associated with confidence, disruption, logical fields and special needs while girls are more likely to be marginalised by their ethnicity while being associated with passivity and creativity (Collins et al. 2000; Eilwood 2008). The influence of intersections here are evident, highlighting that equitable treatment of all genders requires an understanding of these factors (Ailwood 2003; Collins et al. 2000; Connell 2005; MCEETYA 1997). Educators can take action by not homogenising their expectations of students to a cultural or social norm that essentially reinforces mainstream gender constructs (Keddie 2006). In this way, ‘de-gendering’ approaches can be problematic as they ignore the diversity of gender experiences (Murphy 2008; Vickers 2010). Expecting a broad range of gender identities enables educators to develop the empathy denied by ‘mainstream masculinities’, yet required for an equitable future workforce (Connell 2005).

Teachers are encouraged to value many ‘ways of being’ (Keddie 2006; MCEETYA 1997). Passive obedience is valued within our schools, contrasting with the ‘mainstream masculinity’ society values in boys, and in many ways, the workforce (Mac an Ghaill & Haywood 2007). As Ailwood (2003) notes, there seems to be little reasoning behind the failure of boys in education other than their inherent ‘boyhood’. Boys in particular may struggle for social dominance within the school setting, ‘effeminate’ boys becoming the target for bullying (Vickers 2010).Valuing and affirming the diverse knowledge and identities students bring to school, their ‘ways of being’, enables educators to broaden the gender constructs available to their students (Murphy 2008; Keddie 2006). Teachers can achieve this by utilizing resources that are inclusive of a range of masculinities and femininities such as ‘Shrek’ or ‘My Princess Boy’, and presenting a range of ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ behaviours in familiar contexts (ie: both males and females engaging with domestic duties) (Murphy 2008) . By abolishing stereotypes and broadening experiences of masculinities and femininities in their curriculum planning teachers can better prepare their students for work in the twenty-first century (Connell 2005; Murphy 2008; Vickers 2010).

Conclusion

Gender equity issues in Australia can be summarised as a disconnect between social and political agendas; while there is continued political pressure to eliminate disadvantage, our own perceptions prevent us from accepting gender beyond the binary. Educators, in both personal and professional spheres, must broaden their understanding of gender as a construct in order to challenge the gender hierarchy in schools and the community. Everyone experiences gender differently, and as a society, we must work to eliminate the narrow categories we have ascribed to others and accepted for ourselves.

Sexual Victimization In Juvenile Facilities Reported By Youth, 2012www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry12.pdf

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:15:36 -0400

Sexual Victimization In Juvenile Facilities Reported By Youth, 2012www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry12.pdf:

kevinwayne:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry12.pdf

A study by the US Department of Justice on Juvenile facilities 2012, showed that among 1,390 youth who reported victimization by staff, 89.1% were males reporting sexual activity with female staff and 3.0% were males reporting sexual activity with both male and female staff. Males comprised 91% of adjudicated youth in the survey and female staff accounted for 44% of staff.

There are a lot of interesting things to note about the document, I suggest you read. I was particularly appalled at the victimisation rates of homosexual/bisexual youth.

hi. The urban legend (that cannot be refuted or proven) is that the Queen of England refused to sign the ban on female homosexuality along with male homosexuality because "proper ladies don't do that." The prime minister is said to have been so shocked by her sudden outburst he dropped the issue. She signed in banning gay men though. Again, this is all "urban legend" stuff. It's a rumor that passed around the parliament but..you know...gossip...

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 02:20:08 -0400

I guess it’s a theory.

- B

my source of this knowledge comes from a tv show, so i'm not sure how accurate it is, but is it true that in the last century (late 50s), while lesbianism was frowned upon, it was not actually illegal, unlike the activities between two gay men?

Wed, 12 Jun 2013 01:50:40 -0400

I can’t say I know for sure.

Google might though.

Interesting fact if true.

- B

I am interested in the asymmetry of the father’s graph in...

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:34:24 -0400

I am interested in the asymmetry of the father’s graph in comparison to the mothers. Mothers are becoming increasingly accepted in a wider range of roles in the family and work place, yet fathers are still overwhelmingly viewed as needing to be providers. The view of women being stay at home mums is outdated with 40% of households with children having breadwinning mothers. Yet our view of men still isn’t changing.

bioshockalacka: “men are more likely to commit suicide because their problems aren’t taken...

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:55:22 -0400

bioshockalacka:

“men are more likely to commit suicide because their problems aren’t taken seriously”

“yeah but women are more like to attempt suicide!”

BUT IT’S ONLY DE-RAILING A CONVERSATION IF YOU BRING UP MEN’S ISSUES K?

PS; Women are more likely to attempt suicide because they are more likely to use a suicide attempt as a cry for help, they are more likely to use less lethal methods and teenage girls/young women are more likely to have issues with anxiety and depression. Some of these women then ‘attempt’ multiple times, skewing the statistic. Women are more likely to demonstrate such suicidal behaviour and get the attention they need, while men are more likely to bottle it up until they snap and put a bullet through their head.

">90% of rape victims are women >99% of rapists are men 83% of college age men admit they’d..."

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 06:52:21 -0400

“

>90% of rape victims are women

>99% of rapists are men

83% of college age men admit they’d rape a woman if they thought they could get away with it

>25% of women are victims of rape

>50% of women are victims of sexual assault

>6% of men are rapists

every 4 minutes a woman is being raped

every 18 seconds a woman is a victim of domestic abuse

marital rape wasn’t outlawed in the united states until 1993, the united kingdom in 1991

DON’T FEEL BAD FOR MEN

”

- the-identity-police (via terfbored)

Here, have some completely false statistics people blindly accept because it justifies their vilification of an entire gender.

I’m also getting a little bored of rape being the only issue in the world ever.