These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[s]Mars[/s] EVE needs Women!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#401 - 2013-06-07 16:51:18 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Zak Breen wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
People are different.

There are men who prefer what many people would consider "Female" things, and women who enjoy taking cars apart, climbing trees, getting muddy, programming and violencing spaceships.



Ok. So if you want to play, then play, and keep your sex out of it. Smile


Deal, as long as when people hear a non-testosterone influenced voice on comms they dont start bringing sex into it Big smile


Why do the words "never gonna happen" just pop into my head lol.

At 1st those reactions were funny. OMG a girl on comms! You could instantly tell who was and wasn't "getting any" (and by that i mean either young and virginal or old and married) by the pitch of their voice on comms within 5 minutes of a female speaking lol.

After a while it all gets kind of sad.......
Gorgoth24
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#402 - 2013-06-07 17:20:33 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
[quote=Pipernelli Spacemitt]

but even if outside pressure was put on CCP, i cant think of a game that needs such intervention less than this one. eve hates everyone, regardless of where you are from, or your gender. and my guess is that it is because of that "harsh" nature that women are even more paranoid than usual about revealing personal details.

and no, neither eve needs affirmative action nor evil "feminists" will raid your village, so chill and please go make me a sandwich while you are at it. Bear


I completely agree with this. Even the devs know that EVE is a sandbox about building sandcastles - and destroying other people's sandcastles. This is a game driven by paranoia. Massive corp thefts, alliance-level betrayals, organized griefing on a massive scale, and always checking local for that one neut. And I, for one, love it. And if a women were ever to really fit into this game, I think that'd be where you'd have to market it.

Social interaction in this game is everywhere in alliance-level politics. In the dozen or so women I've met who really play this game all seem to be "Queen Bee" types that like the cutthroat politics and social power that comes with alliance positions and corporate drama. Rage on me for being a generalist pig, but it's my observation.

The way to market EVE to women is to show the levels of corporate drama and betrayal that define non-highsec politics in some form of dramatic narrative....almost like an epic t.v. show that was gripping and cold like Game of Thrones, but for EVE.....

I wonder, does that sound familiar?
Xeraphi
Perkone
Caldari State
#403 - 2013-06-07 17:47:19 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Well, we are now seeing more women in STEM subjects, so, there are geeky women out there, who like taking things apart, putting them back together and poking them with a sharp stick :)


That would be because guidance counselors have been taught to stop steering women away from subjects we have an interest in and more towards "traditionally feminine" subjects. At least I hope they have stopped that since I was in high school... I was told I didn't need to study math to go in the arts! Never mind my aptitude tests showed science as a higher level of interest than art because my interest in the arts is fairly narrow in scope whereas I find all of science pretty cool. Never mind that art and science can easily relate to each other - geometric artworks, fractals, medical illustration, the physics of music, etc. I would never want to work as a graphics designer or art teacher but that's where they tried to push me.

In the past the women who showed up on radar as interested in these subjects were the ones who didn't have any interest in anything else and couldn't be steered into more "suitable" career paths for a woman. They were unusually persistent and focused. They often had the support of their fathers to take a different path than the norm, but sometimes they had to rebel completely in order to be true to themselves. But the women who liked both science and art were steered towards art so that men could have the "important" science jobs and "take care of their households" as the breadwinner while the woman "dabbled" in art before having children and pouring all of her creativity into their futures and into supporting her husband.

For those who miss those old days, ever thought what a waste of talent it can be? How selfish it is to demand that the woman always support the man and never the other way around? What if someone had the cure for cancer locked in her brain but was taught to never think of following a career because taking care of one man was more important than helping the entire world? What about women who don't want children, should they sacrifice their future careers for children they'll never have? Oh but everyone is supposed to want to marry and start a family of their own. Right.

Regarding how tired and stale the jokes are: Do you really want to deny the entire world something amazing just so you don't have to make your own sandwich? That's what you're saying every time you make that joke. "Haha I'm so entitled I think the world should revolve around me and so selfish I'd deny a cure for cancer if it came from a woman! I can't be important unless half of humanity is put into slavery for me! I refuse to become an adult because it's your job to take care of me! Aren't I a funny one?" Well that's what I hear whenever a guy says that. I guess it's funny he thinks he's making a joke but is really insulting himself. >.>

There have always been geeky women, it was just unusual for us to have acceptance and support. That's what's becoming more common. More and more men are realizing they aren't worth less as men if they recognize the value of a woman as a person.

There's a psychological stage in childhood where you realize that you're an individual and so is everyone else. It's a scary process.

New target lock death animation problem #1 ^ eye strain and pain Temporary workaround found to one of these.
Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#404 - 2013-06-07 17:52:59 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Deal, as long as when people hear a non-testosterone influenced voice on comms they dont start bringing sex into it Big smile


That's just being a jackass usually. You gotta understand that guys are joking around and harassing each other all the time regardless if a woman is on comms or not. Just throw something back at them and they'll laugh it off. Smile

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Sickotico
Una cabrita
#405 - 2013-06-07 17:58:04 UTC
It's usually other women that stigmatize geeky ones, as well as geeky guys.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#406 - 2013-06-07 18:00:11 UTC
Zak Breen wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
Deal, as long as when people hear a non-testosterone influenced voice on comms they dont start bringing sex into it Big smile


That's just being a jackass usually. You gotta understand that guys are joking around and harassing each other all the time regardless if a woman is on comms or not. Just throw something back at them and they'll laugh it off. Smile



Oh, I know that :)

Actually, it usually goes more like this:

I am helping someone with something, and they ask if I wouldnt mind joining TS cos easier than typing, so I get the server name etc, and hop in, join room with person.

I say "Hey, just checking my mic volume is ok"

They say....."How come you agreed to join voice with me knowing I am from X alliance/coalition"

But then, anyone who is in any of the channels with me knows I am a little.....boisterous :p so, I wouldnt expect to get much hassle in voice past the obvious "Oh ****, I didnt realise you were female"


However, I am aware of females who have got a lot of crap in voice, or in chat, but I also know many guys who are put off by the same crap in voice, its just that someone with a female voice is a more obvious target for being a jackass to, as you dont know which of the male voices is the one that is upset by the channel talk.

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

stoicfaux
#407 - 2013-06-07 18:05:01 UTC
Zak Breen wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
Deal, as long as when people hear a non-testosterone influenced voice on comms they dont start bringing sex into it Big smile


That's just being a jackass usually. You gotta understand that guys are joking around and harassing each other all the time regardless if a woman is on comms or not. Just throw something back at them and they'll laugh it off. Smile

Maybe, maybe not:
Numbers wise, the female player had received three times as many directed negatives than the male player or voiceless one

And if you really want to be embarrassed to be a male gamer: http://www.notinthekitchenanymore.com/

Granted this was for FPS games, but I get the vague feeling it might hold for Eve as well?

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#408 - 2013-06-07 18:11:40 UTC
Xeraphi wrote:
For those who miss those old days, ever thought what a waste of talent it can be? How selfish it is to demand that the woman always support the man and never the other way around? What if someone had the cure for cancer locked in her brain but was taught to never think of following a career because taking care of one man was more important than helping the entire world? What about women who don't want children, should they sacrifice their future careers for children they'll never have? Oh but everyone is supposed to want to marry and start a family of their own. Right.


It's not a waste. Women are obviously more suited for raising children than men - usually, anyhow. Men support women in their own way just as women support men. It's not a one-way street. If you really want a dose of reality, check out previous feminist movements in the past. You don't think this is the only one that has ever happened, do you?

The later Romans complained that although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women demanding admission to the professions previously held solely by men. Soon after both of these periods, social order collapsed and foreign invaders overran the country. Now, the feminist movements aren't solely to blame, but a certain... uneasiness occurs when women move into the world and take over where men used to. Men lose some sense of "identity" because they have no place in society any longer.

There are other more subtle effects - like women having babies later, increasing the risks of birth defects. Now, I'm all for equal rights, but let's face it, men and women are not equal. They both have their advantages over one another as well as their disadvantages.

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#409 - 2013-06-07 18:14:25 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:

Maybe, maybe not:
Numbers wise, the female player had received three times as many directed negatives than the male player or voiceless one

And if you really want to be embarrassed to be a male gamer: http://www.notinthekitchenanymore.com/

Granted this was for FPS games, but I get the vague feeling it might hold for Eve as well?


I think it has more to do with the fact that it is a FPS and nothing but little kids and frat boys play those with any regularity.

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#410 - 2013-06-07 18:25:57 UTC
Mark Androcius wrote:
The vast majority of game devs, programmers and general IT people, are men, this is simply because they are more attracted to computers ( note: i DID NOT say there were no women and i DID NOT say there was no place for women in computing ) and gadgets and games etc etc etc.


Actually, no. The minute women could get to them, they were all over computers. This was the 1960s, though. Women made up a very significant percentage of software developers up until the personal computer revolution really took off in the late '70s and early '80s, when personal computers became sort of like cars or electric guitars, with boys making a point of driving girls away from them so they could use them as a means to compete with other boys and show off to girls. (FYI, I got my first computer in 1981, so I can say I was there to see that.)

When it was merely a question of writing software and debugging it, then getting the results back, women were plenty interested in computers. Until a few years ago, I worked with a woman who was one of the first people to get a computer science degree, in 1965, and who went on to work on the MULTICS project at MIT. I still work with a woman who got her degree a few years later, in economics, and learned to program by writing and running computer simulations for her econ classes.

With the exception of really obvious things like primary and (some) secondary sexual characteristics, differences between individuals drown out differences between genders all day, every day. If you see a huge disparity in gender for a particular activity, it's usually the result of exclusion. To be entirely fair, this goes both ways, as any stay-at-home dad who's taken their kid to a park and been the only man there can attest.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#411 - 2013-06-07 18:33:42 UTC
Eveonlinedating.com

women join for free.

Just dont advertise it as a 'neckbeard buffet' and itll be successful.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Xeraphi
Perkone
Caldari State
#412 - 2013-06-07 19:01:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Xeraphi
Zak Breen wrote:
Xeraphi wrote:
For those who miss those old days, ever thought what a waste of talent it can be? How selfish it is to demand that the woman always support the man and never the other way around? What if someone had the cure for cancer locked in her brain but was taught to never think of following a career because taking care of one man was more important than helping the entire world? What about women who don't want children, should they sacrifice their future careers for children they'll never have? Oh but everyone is supposed to want to marry and start a family of their own. Right.


It's not a waste. Women are obviously more suited for raising children than men - usually, anyhow. Men support women in their own way just as women support men. It's not a one-way street. If you really want a dose of reality, check out previous feminist movements in the past. You don't think this is the only one that has ever happened, do you?

The later Romans complained that although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women demanding admission to the professions previously held solely by men. Soon after both of these periods, social order collapsed and foreign invaders overran the country. Now, the feminist movements aren't solely to blame, but a certain... uneasiness occurs when women move into the world and take over where men used to. Men lose some sense of "identity" because they have no place in society any longer.

There are other more subtle effects - like women having babies later, increasing the risks of birth defects. Now, I'm all for equal rights, but let's face it, men and women are not equal. They both have their advantages over one another as well as their disadvantages.


Ok so what appendage makes women more suitable for cooking or changing diapers than men? Or maybe for bandaging a scrape? Teaching a kid to ride a bike? Men don't have hands?
What appendage makes women more suitable for teaching young children than men? For telling their children they love them, for passing on traditions and critical thinking skills to evaluate those traditions? The mouth?

I agree that pregnancy and breastfeeding are obviously something only women can do, however after the birth is over there are pumps and then the man can feed the baby from the results. There are also women who will never have children either due to biology or to choice, what do you suggest they do with themselves since because they're women they're not allowed to have a "real" career so that a man can have one? Sit at home all day watching soaps? Would you condemn ANYONE to that fate?!

You don't simply force half of humanity to conform to what YOU want them to be so that you don't have to cook... move to a city and get takeout if it's too hard for you.

So we have different physical equipment that is used differently to make children. Is that the only purpose of a human being?

Oh, and OOOOOH if we let women be in positions of power we'll get invaded! That's your excuse?!

Not everyone should be a parent, maybe we need to let people be people first and then consider who wants to be one, before making all decisions of who gets what job based on that.

You even admit that "usually" women are more suited, but you propose nothing for the ones who aren't suited, and yet state it's not a waste. Would you demand that a man give up his career to have children? Or take a pay cut because he's "obviously" going to drop out of the workforce for 5-10 years to have kids? Of course not. So why treat an individual woman that way who might never even have a child? Or who's man wants to be a stay-at-home dad?

We learned back in kindergarten that trying to hammer the wrong peg into the wrong hole ruins the whole playset, but here people are still trying to do that to other people intellectually and spiritually, based solely on biological factors that may not even ever affect the individual. It's unbelievable. You don't cut off someone's brain just because they have a womb, lol!

New target lock death animation problem #1 ^ eye strain and pain Temporary workaround found to one of these.
Shedemei Silfar
Miskatonic Mercantile
#413 - 2013-06-07 19:17:47 UTC
Zak Breen wrote:

It's not a waste. Women are obviously more suited for raising children than men - usually, anyhow. Men support women in their own way just as women support men. It's not a one-way street. If you really want a dose of reality, check out previous feminist movements in the past. You don't think this is the only one that has ever happened, do you?

The later Romans complained that although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women demanding admission to the professions previously held solely by men. Soon after both of these periods, social order collapsed and foreign invaders overran the country. Now, the feminist movements aren't solely to blame, but a certain... uneasiness occurs when women move into the world and take over where men used to. Men lose some sense of "identity" because they have no place in society any longer.

There are other more subtle effects - like women having babies later, increasing the risks of birth defects. Now, I'm all for equal rights, but let's face it, men and women are not equal. They both have their advantages over one another as well as their disadvantages.



Sorry but this makes me laugh... are you really saying that women should pretend to not be capable of doing things men can do because it threatens a male's identity? That men have no sense of self worth if they can't have exclusivity in certain roles?

The really funny (and simultaneously sad) part about this is you might be right about that part. However, it's interesting that knowing that, you don't advocate teaching men to base their self-worth on something real, like being a decent human being, instead of essentially saying that women should stick to their culturally assigned gender roles so as not to threaten male egos. We should therefore pretend that we're not capable of being programmers, soldiers, and scifi nerds... OR we will be responsible for the demise of civilization.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard since that whole "Eve got us kicked outta the Garden of Eden" story.
Sickotico
Una cabrita
#414 - 2013-06-07 19:18:23 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Mark Androcius wrote:
The vast majority of game devs, programmers and general IT people, are men, this is simply because they are more attracted to computers ( note: i DID NOT say there were no women and i DID NOT say there was no place for women in computing ) and gadgets and games etc etc etc.


Actually, no. The minute women could get to them, they were all over computers. This was the 1960s, though. Women made up a very significant percentage of software developers up until the personal computer revolution really took off in the late '70s and early '80s, when personal computers became sort of like cars or electric guitars, with boys making a point of driving girls away from them so they could use them as a means to compete with other boys and show off to girls. (FYI, I got my first computer in 1981, so I can say I was there to see that.)

When it was merely a question of writing software and debugging it, then getting the results back, women were plenty interested in computers. Until a few years ago, I worked with a woman who was one of the first people to get a computer science degree, in 1965, and who went on to work on the MULTICS project at MIT. I still work with a woman who got her degree a few years later, in economics, and learned to program by writing and running computer simulations for her econ classes.

With the exception of really obvious things like primary and (some) secondary sexual characteristics, differences between individuals drown out differences between genders all day, every day. If you see a huge disparity in gender for a particular activity, it's usually the result of exclusion. To be entirely fair, this goes both ways, as any stay-at-home dad who's taken their kid to a park and been the only man there can attest.


You are taking a couple of anecdotes and extrapolating them to the large-scale behaviour of whole sexes.

There ARE inherent differences between the genders that show in statistics.
Just take a look at the most politically correct, affirmative-action-taking countries out there, like the Nordic countries, and you'll see that some areas (like nursing) are still greatly dominated by females, and some (like engineering) greatly dominated by males; to the same extent -or even a larger extent- than in other countries.

Throughout our evolutionary history males and females have fulfilled different roles, so it' completely natural and predictable that we would tend to partake in different activities.
By denying that fact you are making it harder for people to pursue whatever activities they really want, by making them feel guilty if they choose an activity that has been traditionally attached to their gender.

Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrsF7wyUxs8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm5mDjxuOKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOb1b8GYH6c

Men and women don't have to be clones of each other to be equal. Differences between the sexes are not necessarily or inherently a bad thing or a bad symptom, and we don't necessarily have to go out of our way to try to make them go away.
And before the poster above me (Xeraphi) assumes that I'm telling women what to do -like she/he did about Zak Breen-, I suggest you relax and examine the differences between describing X, and prescribing X, because no one here is doing the latter.
Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#415 - 2013-06-07 19:21:22 UTC
Xeraphi wrote:
Ok so what appendage makes women more suitable for cooking or changing diapers than men? Or maybe for bandaging a scrape? Teaching a kid to ride a bike? Men don't have hands?
What appendage makes women more suitable for teaching young children than men? For telling their children they love them, for passing on traditions and critical thinking skills to evaluate those traditions? The mouth?


No doubt men have a part in raising a child. When did I say otherwise?

Quote:
I agree that pregnancy and breastfeeding are obviously something only women can do, however after the birth is over there are pumps and then the man can feed the baby from the results. There are also women who will never have children either due to biology or to choice, what do you suggest they do with themselves since because they're women they're not allowed to have a "real" career so that a man can have one? Sit at home all day watching soaps? Would you condemn ANYONE to that fate?!


They are allowed to have one. Many do. And if a man or a woman wants to sit at home all day and watch soaps, then that's fine too. You seem very angry even though I have not (intentionally) provoked you. Many men have no jobs or careers so women will be able to. There aren't unlimited jobs. Men complain but they are often ignored.

Quote:
You don't simply force half of humanity to conform to what YOU want them to be so that you don't have to cook... move to a city and get takeout if it's too hard for you.

So we have different physical equipment that is used differently to make children. Is that the only purpose of a human being?

Oh, and OOOOOH if we let women be in positions of power we'll get invaded! That's your excuse?!


Biologically, yes, that is the only purpose. And I can cook and clean just fine. It's not an excuse.. it's just a fact. Women (generally speaking) are less aggressive. Less proactive. Men are more aggressive and proactive (again, generally). When women go into positions that were previously held by men, the natural order of things gets screwed up. Women want what men have/had but men do not want what women have/had. I don't know any man that WANTS to be a stay-at-home father while his wife works all the time. It's unnatural. I'm not saying that men can't raise a child, but it takes two to do so - and mothers are arguably more important in that respect. If you don't want a child or don't want to support a man, then DON'T. You have that choice. Just don't expect anyone to care if you change your mind later.

Quote:
Not everyone should be a parent, maybe we need to let people be people first and then consider who wants to be one, before making all decisions of who gets what job based on that.

You even admit that "usually" women are more suited, but you propose nothing for the ones who aren't suited, and yet state it's not a waste. Would you demand that a man give up his career to have children? Or take a pay cut because he's "obviously" going to drop out of the workforce for 5-10 years to have kids? Of course not. So why treat an individual woman that way who might never even have a child? Or who's man wants to be a stay-at-home dad?

We learned back in kindergarten that trying to hammer the wrong peg into the wrong hole ruins the whole playset, but here people are still trying to do that to other people intellectually and spiritually, based solely on biological factors that may not even ever affect the individual. It's unbelievable. You don't cut off someone's brain just because they have a womb, lol!


Uhh.. if you aren't suited, then don't have them. There is nothing wrong with that. I sense much anger in you. For what reasons, I have no clue, but don't put me in the same spot as past men you may have met that screwed up your view of us.

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#416 - 2013-06-07 19:25:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhivre
The nordic countries still have gender stereotypes.

Fulfilling different roles is well and good,but unfortunately, we are not able to say whether that is a result of societal pressure, or because of innate differences.

However.....women are joining courses in the hard sciences, and in engineering at a rate where they may overtake guys soon in some places (My uni has 4 men out of 30 students on this semesters linear algebra course, and problem solving in physics had 2 guys, organic chemistry had 3.....)

Even in nordic countries, there are still assumptions about who is the stay at home parent, and whether nursing is a "manly" job.

As we change away from "pink is for girls, and blue is for boys, girls get dollies and boys get guns" we may see a change.

I know this much, even 50 years ago, saying "I have no intention of getting married and having kids, and want to go and dig stuff up" would have got some strange looks... Now I just get "But why do you not want to have a family"

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#417 - 2013-06-07 19:32:00 UTC
Shedemei Silfar wrote:

Sorry but this makes me laugh... are you really saying that women should pretend to not be capable of doing things men can do because it threatens a male's identity? That men have no sense of self worth if they can't have exclusivity in certain roles?

The really funny (and simultaneously sad) part about this is you might be right about that part. However, it's interesting that knowing that, you don't advocate teaching men to base their self-worth on something real, like being a decent human being, instead of essentially saying that women should stick to their culturally assigned gender roles so as not to threaten male egos. We should therefore pretend that we're not capable of being programmers, soldiers, and scifi nerds... OR we will be responsible for the demise of civilization.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard since that whole "Eve got us kicked outta the Garden of Eden" story.


Yep. You're right. Happy? Can I go somewhere without a woman thinking I am attacking her and the entire female body? Roll

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Troezar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#418 - 2013-06-07 19:36:12 UTC
The real question is why does EVE need to change anything? It's a sandbox, give players the tools and leave the demographics alone. Nothing against female players but some people see anything male dominated to be a threat to humanity.

I don't get this desire to make everything homogeneous, EVE is different that's why I like it. It's dark, dangerous harsh and real. No sugar coating, no fluffy bunnies just death, power and betrayal. No idea why most women wouldn't be interested... Oh and did I mention spreadsheets?
Zak Breen
Breen Enterprises
#419 - 2013-06-07 19:44:08 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
The nordic countries still have gender stereotypes.

Fulfilling different roles is well and good,but unfortunately, we are not able to say whether that is a result of societal pressure, or because of innate differences.

However.....women are joining courses in the hard sciences, and in engineering at a rate where they may overtake guys soon in some places (My uni has 4 men out of 30 students on this semesters linear algebra course, and problem solving in physics had 2 guys, organic chemistry had 3.....)

Even in nordic countries, there are still assumptions about who is the stay at home parent, and whether nursing is a "manly" job.

As we change away from "pink is for girls, and blue is for boys, girls get dollies and boys get guns" we may see a change.

I know this much, even 50 years ago, saying "I have no intention of getting married and having kids, and want to go and dig stuff up" would have got some strange looks... Now I just get "But why do you not want to have a family"


lol you oughta see my family when I say I want to be a Buddhist monk - they think I'm nuts! Lol

Maturity, one discovers, has everything to do with the acceptance of not knowing. http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
Shedemei Silfar
Miskatonic Mercantile
#420 - 2013-06-07 19:46:10 UTC
Zak Breen wrote:
Shedemei Silfar wrote:

Sorry but this makes me laugh... are you really saying that women should pretend to not be capable of doing things men can do because it threatens a male's identity? That men have no sense of self worth if they can't have exclusivity in certain roles?

The really funny (and simultaneously sad) part about this is you might be right about that part. However, it's interesting that knowing that, you don't advocate teaching men to base their self-worth on something real, like being a decent human being, instead of essentially saying that women should stick to their culturally assigned gender roles so as not to threaten male egos. We should therefore pretend that we're not capable of being programmers, soldiers, and scifi nerds... OR we will be responsible for the demise of civilization.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard since that whole "Eve got us kicked outta the Garden of Eden" story.


Yep. You're right. Happy? Can I go somewhere without a woman thinking I am attacking her and the entire female body? Roll


Actually, I don't feel like you're attacking the "female body". But what you're expressing is actually what alot of people believe, and I think you may be right about the identity bit. And I'm sorry if you felt attacked.

The part that I'd actually like people to question however, is why don't we look for another solution to the problem? This is why this issue is both funny and sad. Why should one segment of the population need to limit themselves in order for another to maintain a sense of self-worth?

I'm a systems architect, and a mom. Being one doesn't stop me from being the other. A man who would happen to choose to stay at home to help raise his kids (and I have a good friend who did just that after 3 tours in Iraq) is no less a man for making that choice.

The point is... can we actually take the time to examine and question these beliefs? If people are willing to do that.... that is where real change begins.