Emma Watson on Feminism

[DOTA]

Indeed, but doesn't make it any less dumb or wrong headed. Did people think the Civil Rights movement was bullshit because The Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam took it too far? Or because they focused on the plight of blacks rather than emphasising that whites were just as good? And why does the GLBT movement focus on the rights of gays rather than everyone? Bunch of anti-straight bigots.

Now I'm sure some people did, and still do argue those points. But they were idiots, and invariably using them to vindicate their opinions, and history shows them up as such.

Yep. I feel like we might be getting worse though. Everyone's an expert on everything, these days, without needing to actually have a clue what they're talking about. UN ambassadors, for example. Watson's a rarity among them, in actually putting effort in rather than just smiling and talking about it on chat shows. The age of the idiot etc.

I depressed myself there.

EDIT -

Old disapproving man is old and disapproves.

 

[rcoobc]

Indeed, but doesn't make it any less dumb or wrong headed. Did people think the Civil Rights movement was bullshit because The Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam took it too far? Or because they focused on the plight of blacks rather than emphasising that whites were just as good? And why does the GLBT movement focus on the rights of gays rather than everyone? Bunch of anti-straight bigots.

Now I'm sure some people did, and still do argue those points. But they were idiots, and invariably using them to vindicate their opinions, and history shows them up as such.

Amazing point. Enjoyed that.

 

[Mad Winger]

Both genders have different problems, but as far as politics and the justice system go, most top-ranked OECD countries have been perfectly gender equal for a long time. The Wage Gap can easily be explained by adding a few simple variables. They have not been able to prove that men and women in the same job, with the same education, with the same number of workhours and sickdays, working for the same amount of time, have a wage gap. The only thing they've managed to prove, is that the average man has a higher salary than the average woman. Which is a pointless statistic on its own.

If modern feminists were so crazy about "gender equality", they would have agreed to change their name to "egalitarians" a long time ago. The fact that they haven't, speaks volums.

 

[Eboue]

 

[Mad Winger]

Please provide a research that can prove the following:

They have not been able to prove that men and women in the same job, with the same education, with the same number of workhours and sickdays, working for the same amount of time, have a wage gap.

I will respect modern feminism when they can prove this.

 

[Silva]

There's no logical reason why women should be making less money than men. But they do.

The first year out of college is the prime time for women and men to make comparable earnings: they are young, childless, and have just as much inexperience as their male counterparts. But women make less than men in their first year after graduating, even when factors such as schools, grades, majors, and others are taken into account. That educational gap will follow them no matter how much more higher learning they invest in: at any educational level, a man with the same degree earns more, on average.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/08/3424043/gender-wage-gap-myth/

 

[Conrad]

Please provide a research that can prove the following:



I will respect modern feminism when they can prove this.

Why do you feel the need to reduce the entire legitimacy of modern day feminism to one question?*

I'm no expert but feminism has never been solely about the wage gap but more about a women's place in society as a whole. Also why would you wait until inequality had been absolutely proved in this one hyper specific way before doing anything about it.
* I think I have a hunch.

 

[Silva]

A specific point he just happens to be wrong about, to boot.

 

[rcoobc]

A specific point he just happens to be wrong about, to boot.

And hasn't bothered to prove anything himself but demands proof against his claims.

 

[Mad Winger]

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/08/3424043/gender-wage-gap-myth/

I'll read the whole report later. I find this part of your link interesting, though:

It’s fair to say that not all of the gap is due to discrimination. Certainly women are clustered in low-wage work — they are about two-thirds of the country’s minimum wage workers — and often have to interrupt their careers to care for family members, all of which impacts their earnings. But even when various factors like these are taken into account, the entire gap doesn’t disappear. When the Government Accountability Office last looked at the gap, it couldn’t explain 20 percent of the disparity in pay between men and women, something that could be at least in part caused by discrimination.

So according to some reports, roughly 80% of the wage gap can be explained by other factors than discrimination. That alone makes the wage gap significantly smaller.

I think the elephant in the room is this: at the end of the day, your priorities is what matters the most. Men, on average, tend to care more about money, status and power than women do, who in return seem to value flexibility, low-stress, and harmony. You could argue that society has shaped women to be less ambitious, but here's the thing: who the feck decided that money is the most important thing? Having a good work-life balance, low pressure and a generally good work-enironment, could easily be well worth earning a little less over.

 

[Silva]

I'll read the whole report later. I find this part of your link interesting, though:



So according to some reports, roughly 80% of the wage gap can be explained by other factors than discrimination. That alone makes the wage gap significantly smaller.

I think the elephant in the room is this: at the end of the day, your priorities is what matters the most. Men, on average, tend to care more about money, status and power than women do, who in return seem to value flexibility, low-stress, and harmony. You could argue that society has shaped women to be less ambitious, but here's the thing: who the feck decided that money is the most important thing? Having a good work-life balance, low pressure and a generally good work-enironment, could easily be well worth earning a little less over.

I think you'll find you were asking for proof that women get paid less for directly comparable jobs, which was provided. You've gotta show feminism respect now, you promised. But please, carry on pulling nonsense out of your arse instead. Because none of you're saying explains why there is is a pay gap, even if you seem to think it's insignificant.

And you decided it's the most important thing ever when you burst into this thread all high and mighty declaring sexism dead because the pay gap is some sort of misunderstood numbers game.

 

[Mad Winger]

I think you'll find you were asking for proof that women get paid less for directly comparable jobs, which was provided. You've gotta show feminism respect now, you promised.

Well, your link already proves that 80% of that 23% wage gap isn't caused by discrimination. And the latter 20% doesn't necessarily equal discrimination.

As long as factors like "personal priorities" are at play, it will be pretty much impossible to prove that it's because of discrimination. What if guys tend to work harder? What if guys tend to be prone to nagging for a raise, whereas girls are more careful? What if guys are more willing to take risks, which in return pulls up the average for all men in cases where they succeed big time?

As long as men and women tend to have different priorities and interests, there will also be a lot of differences between how the genders on general turn out in society. Men tend to come out with higher salaries, but they face other problems. The average man is less happy, generally have worse health, is more depressed, more likely to commit suicide, more likely to get beaten up, more likely to get murdered, more likely to die at work, more likely to die in accidents, more likely to turn to heavy drug and alcohol abuse, much less likely to have children and get married, much more likely to suffer from an unwanted divorce, and much less likely to be able to keep the kids in such cases.

Am I saying that men have it worse? No, by no means. But we also have struggles. We know that women earn less on average. But we don't know for sure how much of this can be blamed on discrimination(if anything at all).

 

[Silva]

Well, your link already proves that 80% of that 23% wage gap isn't caused by discrimination. And the latter 20% doesn't necessarily equal discrimination.

As long as factors like "personal priorities" are at play, it will be pretty much impossible to prove that it's because of discrimination. What if guys tend to work harder? What if guys tend to be prone to nagging for a raise, whereas girls are more careful? What if guys are more willing to take risks, which in return pulls up the average for all men in cases where they succeed big time?

As long as men and women tend to have different priorities and interests, there will also be a lot of differences between how the genders on general turn out in society. Men tend to come out with higher salaries, but they face other problems. The average man is less happy, generally have worse health, is more depressed, more likely to commit suicide, more likely to get beaten up, more likely to get murdered, more likely to die at work, more likely to die in accidents, more likely to turn to heavy drug and alcohol abuse, much less likely to have children and get married, much more likely to suffer from an unwanted divorce, and much less likely to be able to keep the kids in such cases.

Am I saying that men have it worse? No, by no means. But we also have struggles. We know that women earn less on average. But we don't know for sure how much of this can be blamed on discrimination(if anything at all).

You're not selling the whole "equality has been achieved in developed countries" very well here.

 

[evra]

What does her father think about all this?

I was trying to think of something poignant to say on the subject of feminism, came up empty and decided to go with something facetious.

 

[Silva]

What does her father think about all this?

What?

 

[Mad Winger]

You're not selling the whole "equality has been achieved in developed countries" very well here.

As far a social trends go, no. In that sense, both men and women suffer, in different ways. But in terms of the justice system, salaries, job hunting etc, we have been gender equal in Norway for a loooong time.

 

[Madthinker]

Well, your link already proves that 80% of that 23% wage gap isn't caused by discrimination. And the latter 20% doesn't necessarily equal discrimination.

As long as factors like "personal priorities" are at play, it will be pretty much impossible to prove that it's because of discrimination. What if guys tend to work harder? What if guys tend to be prone to nagging for a raise, whereas girls are more careful? What if guys are more willing to take risks, which in return pulls up the average for all men in cases where they succeed big time?

As long as men and women tend to have different priorities and interests, there will also be a lot of differences between how the genders on general turn out in society. Men tend to come out with higher salaries, but they face other problems. The average man is less happy, generally have worse health, is more depressed, more likely to commit suicide, more likely to get beaten up, more likely to get murdered, more likely to die at work, more likely to die in accidents, more likely to turn to heavy drug and alcohol abuse, much less likely to have children and get married, much more likely to suffer from an unwanted divorce, and much less likely to be able to keep the kids in such cases.

Am I saying that men have it worse? No, by no means. But we also have struggles. We know that women earn less on average. But we don't know for sure how much of this can be blamed on discrimination(if anything at all).

Apart from the sex ratio, a few men sowing their oats and gay marriages, doesn't it take two to tango in both of these things, from pretty much identical population sizes?

 

[Silva]

As far a social trends go, no. In that sense, both men and women suffer, in different ways. But in terms of the justice system, salaries, job hunting etc, we have been gender equal in Norway for a loooong time.

The Scandinavian countries are significantly ahead of the rest of the world in that regard though and you shouldn't think the rest of the world, developed or otherwise, is on par with Norway. But equality is about more than just those things. It's also about men and women being treated exactly the same way and being afforded the same opportunities, and unless you've completely overcome conservatism in Norway I think it's unlikely that you're done. Maybe you should read Emmas speech again because she touches on a few of the points you do as well, men and women shouldn't have different expectations put on them.

 

[evra]

What?

I was trying to think of something poignant to say on the subject of feminism, came up empty and decided to go with something facetious.

 

[Eboue]

Please provide a research that can prove the following:



I will respect modern feminism when they can prove this.

I don't think I will. Not much to say to someone who thinks that feminists need to change their name to "egalitarians" in order to be taken seriously.

 

[Eriku]

Christ, Mad Winger, you really think that there's not that much of a gap? I mean, Scandinavia's got it good, but there's still not real equality, and the studies tend to control for the factors you mention. And with this being a thread on Emma Watson bringing attention on feminism for the UN, I think it's safe to say there's plenty to sink your teeth into considering the state of women's rights elsewhere in the world. We also know that fostering more equality for women, and ensuring they can break out of the cycle of being there just to rear children would bring up the floor of the third world in a big way.

 

[Donut]

Is it wrong I masturbated to the video?

 

[Eriku]

 

[adexkola]

Indeed, but doesn't make it any less dumb or wrong headed. Did people think the Civil Rights movement was bullshit because The Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam took it too far? Or because they focused on the plight of blacks rather than emphasising that whites were just as good? And why does the GLBT movement focus on the rights of gays rather than everyone? Bunch of anti-straight bigots.

Now I'm sure some people did, and still do argue those points. But they were idiots, and invariably using them to vindicate their opinions, and history shows them up as such.

On the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam point:

1. The more extreme Nation of Islam lost relevance after Malcolm X left the organization and was subsequently murdered by several of it's members. The Black Panther's methods gave the government legitimacy to imprison and kill them off prematurely. The movement that dominated and defined the Civil Rights movement by far was the nonviolent movements and protests led by Martin Luther King. That is a classic example of a campaign being led by the moderate wing. It is the onus of the moderate, sensible, wing to control the movement and message. If extremist feminists are getting the shine then the sensible moderates are doing a lot wrong.

2. More on Martin Luther King. He did not alienate White America during his campaign. He recognized that there was a sizable proportion of white people in America that didn't actually hate blacks, but were just brought up and lived in a system that dis-enfranchised blacks. Instead he sought to educate and enlighten whites. Later in his life he actively campaigned for whites that were alienated by poverty, the Vietnam War... before his death. My point here is that you can't alienate and demarcate a population who's attitudes you're trying to change as the enemy. The majority of feminists don't do this but when a lot of males feel targeted instead of educated by the feminist message, then a rethink is needed.

Very good speech/essay by Watson (that Brown education rubbing off on her). That is more of what we need. An engagement and discussion, instead of bile flinging.

 

[Mogget]

Why do you feel the need to reduce the entire legitimacy of modern day feminism to one question?*

I'm no expert but feminism has never been solely about the wage gap but more about a women's place in society as a whole. Also why would you wait until inequality had been absolutely proved in this one hyper specific way before doing anything about it.
* I think I have a hunch.

Possibly because it seems that some of the loudest voices in modern day feminism come from middle class white women complaining about trivial matters, or stuff which only affects few, already well off women. Apart from that and the way which they tend to ignore the issues non white women face I have no problem with feminism.

 

[Mad Winger]

Apart from the sex ratio, a few men sowing their oats and gay marriages, doesn't it take two to tango in both of these things, from pretty much identical population sizes?

Women tend to prefer "nicely used men". In other words, a lot of the men who get divorced, re-marry. I belive roughly 80% of women get married/have children, opposed to 60% of men. And the number is going down for men, while staying the same for women.

The Scandinavian countries are significantly ahead of the rest of the world in that regard though and you shouldn't think the rest of the world, developed or otherwise, is on par with Norway..

Here's the thing though: even feminists in Norway scream about the exact same things as the Americans. They use American statistics to prove their point, often adding comments like: "and people think we don't need feminism in Norway anymore?" It's because modern day feminists tend to have a victim-mentality, and thus grasp at straws to prove their point. They are just as bad as these Men's Rights Activists. What will happen when the US reach Norway-level gender equality? Are feminists over there going point to Iranian statistics to prove their point?

Another thing that bothers me about feminism, is that 99% of the articles I see on feminist websites or links posted by feminst friends on facebook, focus solely on women. There are plenty of male-exclusive problems they could have written about if they were truly egalitarian, so I don't buy the bullshit argument that they only write about women because women have much more problems.

You can be for gender equality without calling yourself a feminist. I therefore choose to do so.

I don't think I will. Not much to say to someone who thinks that feminists need to change their name to "egalitarians" in order to be taken seriously.

Fair enough. Now excuse me as I make a movement called "White Rights". We want to end racism on all the races. Don't be confused or insulted by the name.

 

[Eboue]

Fair enough. Now excuse me as I make a movement called "White Rights". We want to end racism on all the races. Don't be confused or insulted by the name.

You are literally Stephen Colbert's character.

 

[adexkola]

I'm still not clued in on the whole wage gap thing. A few years ago, a spreadsheet containing the pay of about 30 new hires at my company was emailed to me by HR mistakenly. All the hires came straight out of college and were on the same level coming in, yet starting salaries varied by as much as $15,000, even between males and females. I'm not convinced that people in today's society pay someone less just because of sex. And as a stats student I know how complicated stats can be.

 

[rcoobc]

Two things

1) if feminism was about manhating, Watson will get a tirrade of abuse

2) I'm so excited that this could possibly be the end of internet biogoted idea about feminism

 

[Eriku]

Women tend to prefer "nicely used men". In other words, a lot of the men who get divorced, re-marry. I belive roughly 80% of women get married/have children, opposed to 60% of men. And the number is going down for men, while staying the same for women.

What on earth is this point raised for? Do women not have every right to choose who they procreate with?

 

[adexkola]

Possibly because it seems that some of the loudest voices in modern day feminism come from middle class white women complaining about trivial matters, or stuff which only affects few, already well off women. Apart from that and the way which they tend to ignore the issues non white women face I have no problem with feminism.

Again, from my anecdotal world, I'm friends with this feminist, who also happens to be black. She rants on twitter about how mainstream feminism ignores women of color, poor women, etc. That sentiment is rapidly gaining momentum. (Again, from my narrow viewpoint; I'm sure some googled article will back me up here).

 

[rcoobc]

What on earth is this point raised for? Do women not have every right to choose who they procreate with?

There is a point in there somewhere. Somewhere.

 

[adexkola]

Two things

1) if feminism was about manhating, Watson will get a tirrade of abuse

2) I'm so excited that this could possibly be the end of internet biogoted idea about feminism

1) Well duh... It's not. Then why is it perceived as such? And why the feck are rational feminists doing little to change this perception?

2) What? Watson's essay? MadWinger's weird monologue?

 

[Eboue]

On the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam point:

1. The more extreme Nation of Islam lost relevance after Malcolm X left the organization and was subsequently murdered by several of it's members. The Black Panther's methods gave the government legitimacy to imprison and kill them off prematurely. The movement that dominated and defined the Civil Rights movement by far was the nonviolent movements and protests led by Martin Luther King. That is a classic example of a campaign being led by the moderate wing. It is the onus of the moderate, sensible, wing to control the movement and message. If extremist feminists are getting the shine then the sensible moderates are doing a lot wrong.

This isn't really related to feminism but Martin Luther King's movement benefited greatly from the violent alternative that Malcolm offered. Whites in power wouldn't have been so willing to work with MLK without fearing what Malcolm had to offer if they had refused.

As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

 

[Ryan's Beard]

Mad Winger hasn't taken Kagawa's sale well at all has he?

 

[rcoobc]

1) Well duh... It's not. Then why is it perceived as such? And why the feck are rational feminists doing little to change this perception?

2) What? Watson's essay? MadWinger's weird monologue?

Watson's speech/essay. It will take a long time, obviously, but every time some stupid 14 year old brat who rants about feminist man-haters appears in the wild, the saner internet has a one click super-effective solution from the highest profile feminist you can imagine.

 

[Eriku]

Society's still got such a long way to go when it comes to the subtle things. Movies and TV-shows where women are prizes rather than protagonists. The subtle misogyny that Watson pointed to with women being "bossy" if they try to impose themselves at all. The pressure to have children and to focus more on that than anything like a career or self-fullfilment, etc. etc.

 

[Silva]

Here's the thing though: even feminists in Norway scream about the exact same things as the Americans. They use American statistics to prove their point, often adding comments like: "and people think we don't need feminism in Norway anymore?" It's because modern day feminists tend to have a victim-mentality, and thus grasp at straws to prove their point. They are just as bad as these Men's Rights Activists. What will happen when the US reach Norway-level gender equality? Are feminists over there going point to Iranian statistics to prove their point?

Another thing that bothers me about feminism, is that 99% of the articles I see on feminist websites or links posted by feminst friends on facebook, focus solely on women. There are plenty of male-exclusive problems they could have written about if they were truly egalitarian, so I don't buy the bullshit argument that they only write about women because women have much more problems.

You can be for gender equality without calling yourself a feminist. I therefore choose to do so.

I don't know much about feminists in Norway, but you're the only person in this thread that has a victims mentality.

Feminists focus mostly on women because women have had the short end of the stick for thousands of years. A short perioud of time of relative equality in Norway isn't enough to give up. You're welcome to campaign for changes that are faces solely by men, no ones going to stop you.

Anyone who is for gender equality is a feminist, sorry to disappoint.

 

[Silva]

Society's still got such a long way to go when it comes to the subtle things. Movies and TV-shows where women are prizes rather than protagonists. The subtle misogyny that Watson pointed to with women being "bossy" if they try to impose themselves at all. The pressure to have children and to focus more on that than anything like a career or self-fullfilment, etc. etc.

It starts when they're pretty much out of the womb. "What a clever boy" "what a pretty dress she's wearing" set the tone for what society's gonna do to the poor little things.

 

[adexkola]

This isn't really related to feminism but Martin Luther King's movement benefited greatly from the violent alternative that Malcolm offered. White in power wouldn't have been so willing to work with MLK without fearing what Malcolm had to offer if they had refused.

That was his greatest speech IMO.

And I agree, but that's another advantage the moderate activist holds. He/she can just point at the extremist and say "see, we're not so bad as those nutters". Obviously you would want to come forward with some original merit to your movement, but the comparison offers another advantage.