So, women, by virtue of biology, should have no recourse?
i didn't say that. you wanted to know why men didn't have to make that choice as often. if men physically carried the children, and it affected their health, things would be the other way around. it's simple fact of not just biology and physioology, but logic. only one member can carry the child during pregnancy, and that person happens to always be female. incredibily sexist, wouldn't you say?
want a solution? grow babies in pods. i'm sorry, i didn't create mankind. if i had, i would have done it more fairly.
Yes, men don't grow babies inside them. That's why we give women a break on the tenure clock, to reflect biological reality. It's the same reason we build wheelchair ramps.
yes. why is this a problem? accomodate special needs. this is a good thing.
Thanks, by the way, for addressing me like I'm an idiot.
you said that men didn't have the problem -- like it's something we're doing wrong.
I don't recall making that argument. For someone who's complaining about people not reading, your posts continue to bear little relation to mine.
you wanted the know why 70% of undergrads are female, but a much much smaller number makes it through to professorial faculty, implying that gender discrimination was the prime suspect. i argued that it was not the prime suspect.
problem a more sweeping societal difference is the cause. stereotyped gender roles, as opposed to actual discrimination. same reason most elementary school teachers are female by a landslide. it's not that they're not letting men do it, it's that men typical don't do it for some reason or another.
this is the sort of thing postmodern feminism is actually addressing. societal gender roles.
Your assertion that percieved injusticies against men in popular entertainment was somehow more important than real inequity for women was an insult to me or any thinking person. I merely returned the favor.
oh, oh i see how it is. right.
so, ok, everytime ralph threatened to hit alice on the hooneymooners, that wasn't really important enough to matter? and when we see rap stars objectifying money in their videos, that's ok too? it's just tv, right, doesn't matter?
i've got some news for you. entertainment and pop-culture not only reflects the culture that makes it, but affects it as well. "perceived injustices" on television tell us what and how the society responsible think, much more so than elected official could ever represent their population.
yes, there is real injustice going on. and as a society we do regard the genders differently.
but i, as a thinking person, am insulted by the view that these gender inequalities are more important than say, the atrocities of war.
I claimed to be an authority in regards to my own experience with women's studies at my own college, which I am. I never claimed that my experiences were universal - in fact, I've been careful to specifically avoid making that claim - unlike you.
You're the one who told me that I was "missing something" at my own college
you obviously did. i got something you didn't, and i am no authority. there was something you did not get, therefore, you missed something. qed.
i'm not saying i didn't, but from the way you talk about feminism you have a boatload of misunderstandings about it which would easily be rectified by auditing a course. trust me, the literature criticism isn't enough.
i took one called "the feminist perspective on science and technology."
Your experience of the class might be substantially different - as a matter of fact, speaking of calculus, I once had a calculus professor who taught the class with a decidedly feminist bent.
It is experiences of classes we're discussing, here, and you've repeatedly told me that somehow I "missed something"; that I didn't have the experience that I've said I had. That's a considerable arrogant presumption on your part.
and integral is an integral is an integral. it would be one thing if i had, say, a different fundamental theorem of calculus.
well, here, we have a difference in opinion on the fundamental basis for feminism. since i've had a class in it, and you have not, it's safe to assume i know what i'm talking about more than you do.
But what you've described is not feminism, it's women's studies. You're conflating feminist literary theory with the movement of feminism, which has been my point all along.
my women's study class had the word feminist in the title. we discussed feminist theory. we discussed the history of feminism as a movement.
™ Version 4.2
