Thomas Aquinas on women

[origamikaren]

OK, I was exaggerating on the Harvard guy thing, but have you been a woman trying to get a job in the sciences or other male dominated fields like computers?  Sure, most women don't want one, and that's fine, but those that do have a hard time.  

I have been in that position.  I've never been on a team with more than three women in a group of twelve to fifteen, and I've often been the only one.  Generally the women last about a third as long as the guys do, and I've NEVER worked under a woman in computers.  

I think that the major reason for this is that in order to get anywhere in male dominated fields you have to be one of the guys, or at least be able to pretend you are.  I know enough about cars and video games and computer hardware and sports to be able to hold up my side of the conversation during social times, and so when we're working I can get help when I need it, and they'll listen to my expertise when I happen to know more.  The other women are often simply shut out.

Also, do you watch TV at all?  Do you notice how women are portrayed in commercials?  If you want an extreme taste of what I'm talking about, go watch just the commercials on Spike TV.  They're like beer ads -- women are objects to use for sex if they're not your wife, or someone who nags you and gets in the way of having fun if she is your wife or mother.

I'm NOT saying that sexism is as bad as it has been.  Most people pay at least lip-service to the idea of equal rights.  I'm NOT saying that there isn't reverse sexism.  Certainly a white male has a harder time getting a scholarship than a Native American, disabled woman.  What I AM saying is that pretending that it's all gone in our enlightened age is ridiculous.  Just like saying that all racism is gone as well.

Now I don't blame THE MAN for all my hardships in life.  I don't think anyone has set out to oppress me, but there is still a (sometimes) subtle but pervasive presence that is influencing the way that YOU think and act, and you should be aware of it.

[JP Dogberry]

No such thing as reverse sexism, only Sexism.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

actually, my last three jobs in IT have been under the direct supervision management of a woman. In my last job, both my immediate supervisor and her supervisor were women. Here at my current job (we're make software) only 1/3 of the office is staffed by men. Of the three most technical jobs, only one is staffed by a man (that's me).

I never claimed that all sexism is gone. I'm just saying that you depict a much bleaker picture than it really is.

[fuzzyoctopus]

Also, do you watch TV at all?  Do you notice how women are portrayed in commercials?  If you want an extreme taste of what I'm talking about, go watch just the commercials on Spike TV.  They're like beer ads -- women are objects to use for sex if they're not your wife, or someone who nags you and gets in the way of having fun if she is your wife or mother.

This is really a poor example, because men get portrayed just as badly as women do on TV - they're all incompetent and stupid, and often insensitive.  Remember that Cambells commercial for the heat and go soup that is ready in just one minute?

[Entsuropi]

Less women are managers in IT. There are less women in IT. The higher the number of a particular group, the more managers of that type will be chosen.

It's fairly simple mathematics to my mind.

[Skar]

Now I don't blame THE MAN for all my hardships in life.  I don't think anyone has set out to oppress me, but there is still a (sometimes) subtle but pervasive presence that is influencing the way that YOU think and act, and you should be aware of it.

Your use of the word "you" in all caps here disturbs me.  Perhaps you had your tongue in your cheek.  And I would point out that there is a "pervasive" and totally unsubtle "presence that is influencing the way that YOU think and act, and you should be aware of it."

While I haven't happened to work directly under any women in my time in the technical fields, I have been interviewed by women supervisors in those fields.  Right now I work side by side with a woman who is product manager of a software group and generally my experience has been the opposite of what you describe.

And, to answer your question, No, I have never been a woman doing anything, much less struggling for a promotion in a computer field.  Kind of silly to bring up POV in this case.

You also say:

I think that the major reason for this is that in order to get anywhere in male dominated fields you have to be one of the guys, or at least be able to pretend you are.  I know enough about cars and video games and computer hardware and sports to be able to hold up my side of the conversation during social times, and so when we're working I can get help when I need it, and they'll listen to my expertise when I happen to know more.  The other women are often simply shut out.

Were I a manager I would hesitate to promote someone who spent so much time pretending to be someone they're not (eg. "one of the guys").  Men who don't fit in the social group have the same problems women who don't fit in the social group have.  It's not a function of sex it's a function of who is easier to work with.

Found an all woman IT department and the same kind of thing will happen in the the opposite direction.  Such is life.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I also want to point out that I am the only person in my office who was at all excited about Star Wars, Hitch Hikers, or any superhero movies lately. *I* am the one who isn't "one of the girls" but we still get along.

[origamikaren]

No such thing as reverse sexism, only Sexism.

Sorry, poor choice of words on my part, but you take my meaning.

I never claimed that all sexism is gone. I'm just saying that you depict a much bleaker picture than it really is.

If you remember, I was responding to the post (below) which implied that nobody believed any of Thomas Aquinas's ideas on women anymore...

I don't see a reason to get mad at someone who lived 800 years ago and that no reasonable people believes anymore

...especially the stuff about women being passive, inferior, and not as good at thinking.  I was trying to point out that there ARE still people, and plenty of them, that at least act as if that's true.

Your use of the word "you" in all caps here disturbs me.  Perhaps you had your tongue in your cheek.  And I would point out that there is a "pervasive" and totally unsubtle "presence that is influencing the way that YOU think and act, and you should be aware of it."

I type in All Caps when I want a word to stand out.  It's easier than bold or italics, which you can't always trust in emails and text files.

Of course I'm being influenced by the media, everybody is, and that's my point.  The popular media is teaching and reinforcing the sexist ideas of years past, as well as the current anti-male stuff that's becoming more and more prevalent.  I wanted to show that these ideas are alive and well in the world today, and that saying that no resonable person believes them anymore is shutting your eyes to reality.  

Of course, my examples were extreme and exaggerated.  That was also part of my point.  I wanted to show the absolute worst I could come up with on short notice, to show that there are reasonable people who are saying and doing these kinds of things, and it's not as isolated as we'd all like to believe.

I know that sexism is not as bad as it once was, just as racism seems to be getting better in the big picture, but there is still work to do... and to use another extreme and likely inflammitory statement, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

[Entsuropi]

All those women in adverts that make you think is sexist...

You do realise they CHOSE to do that role? Some women enjoy being naked, and feel it gives power to them through sexuality. That's the line that hugh hefner uses a lot, to boot.

Just because someone has a different interpretation of morality from you does not make them oppressed.

[origamikaren]

All those women in adverts that make you think is sexist...

You do realise they CHOSE to do that role?

Yeah... just like all those black actors in the thirties CHOSE to be portrayed as servants, fools, and minstrels.  And all the girls who end up prostituting themselves on the streets CHOOSE that path in life.  If you pay some people enough, they'll do anything.

I realize that SOME women like that, but for many, it's the only acting job they could get, or they don't realize that they have other assets that could give them power or control in life.  

That kind of reasoning remids me of all those paternalistic Englishmen who had totally convinced themselves that the natives they conquered really liked being ruled over by a foreign power.  Just because somebody does something willingly doesn't mean they're NOT being oppressed.

[Entsuropi]

...

What about Holly Valance, Lil Kim, Britney Spears and that short little brunette canadian pop star, all of whom have appeared naked in their music videos. I very seriously doubt anyone made them do that.

Not to mention pr0n actresses, many of whom do promotional tours.

These people do not act like oppressed victims of a vast and evil male conspiracy. They act like women who have no problem doing what they do. As I said, different morality does not mean oppressed.

[Entsuropi]

That kind of reasoning remids me of all those paternalistic Englishmen who had totally convinced themselves that the natives they conquered really liked being ruled over by a foreign power.

Are we talking about the african tribes who sold each other into slavery here? Or the indians who were turned into a prosperous unified country after we conquered all the squabbling little city states?

[Archon]

I think that this discussion is interesting, so I think I should say something. I also foresee it getting locked because it is an easy topic to get overexcited about. So, to everyone who is going to be part of the conversation, just make sure you play nice, ok? Like I said, I think this could be a fun conversation, as long as it doesn't turn mean.

[Master Gopher]

*Sudden silence as people realise they don't have anything nice to say*

(Actually *my* mother always said if you have nothing nice to say you must be surrounded by fools...)

Are we talking about the african tribes who sold each other into slavery here? Or the indians who were turned into a prosperous unified country after we conquered all the squabbling little city states?

I might be being thick, but what relevance do those african slaves have to repression/european paternalism? The point is whether or not those who are repressed *choose* to be repressed (in reference to attitudes to women), not whether specific groups were undergoing repression at particular times.

Also (at the risk of contradicitng myself and continuing a kinda irrelevant line of argument) - India is not exactly a prosperous, unified country. Read some Arundhati Roy.

[Archon]

OrigamiKaren, you bring up the point of girls who are forced into prostitution, but the fact is that if they looked hard enough, they could find another job that wasn't of that nature. They choose that kind of job for other reasons than necessity, because if it were necessity, they could find other jobs. Besides that, if that is their last resort, then wouldn't you say it is a positive thing to have those kinds of institutions. Granted, they are not the sorts of things lthat we like to think about morally, but if you get rid of these "jobs" because they are sexist, there will be more starving women. I don't think that that is a better outcome, so, although you may not like them, they do have a purpose.Either they are a last resort, or they are a way for women to make money easier than they would have to otherwise. Either way, it is a positive to women.