1st world Feminism. Is it necessary?

[Revoltingest]

That hasn't been the trend though, especially in an economy where a successful advertising campaign often makes the difference between a product being accepted or ignored by consumers, regardless of things such as product quality, company management and policy, and other things that matter but they don't. Microsoft, Apple, Wal-Mart, McDonald's and Nestle are probably the pinnacle of such examples of poor product quality, immoral, unethical, and even at times illegal business practices, and business operations that most people would find appalling, yet they are some of the wealthiest corporations and most successful in business. AIG was ran by people who asked for bailout money to go on vacation, and the company is still around.

The survival of the fittest stochastic process cannot be understood by looking at isolated examples.
It's about general trends (emergent properties) over time. Better practices which confer a competitive
advantage tend to win out. Even if we introduce your claims of corruption (crony capitalism), employing
superior practices will still enable one corrupt company to out compete the corrupt company with inferior
methods.

Regarding the very real problem of inferior workers being promoted over superior ones, this is & will
always be a problem because evaluation is difficult, no matter how objective the process can be made.
This will persist in any kind of economy, be it free market or government run. But statistically, if a method
tends to promote the superior worker, then company results will tend to be better, thereby conferring
a competitive advantage, & better survivability in the marketplace.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

What do you think is ultimately behind superior performance by girls?

Perhaps Female attributes are more suited to the complex communication world in which we live. And can see clearer paths through the complexities.

Men seemed to have clear advantages during the first industrial age.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Okay my posts get deleted, so this is not a balanced discussion anymore. I wont even read all the other replies made to me.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The survival of the fittest stochastic process cannot be understood by looking at isolated examples.
It's about general trends (emergent properties) over time. Better practices which confer a competitive
advantage tend to win out. Even if we introduce your claims of corruption (crony capitalism), employing
superior practices will still enable one corrupt company to out compete the corrupt company with inferior
methods.

Regarding the very real problem of inferior workers being promoted over superior ones, this is & will
always be a problem because evaluation is difficult, no matter how objective the process can be made.
This will persist in any kind of economy, be it free market or government run. But statistically, if a method
tends to promote the superior worker, then company results will tend to be better, thereby conferring
a competitive advantage, & better survivability in the marketplace.

The problem of Identifying the best worker may be due to the Dunning Kruger effect. Mentioned previously.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
At least it would tend to continue the status quo.

 

[Revoltingest]

Perhaps Female attributes are more suited to the complex communication world in which we live. And can see clearer paths through the complexities.

But perhaps not.
I'm skeptical of claims that one gender is superior to another in the work environment.
Even if this could be shown to be the case, individual variation would overwhelm it.

Men seemed to have clear advantages during the first industrial age.

This is far more due to cultural influence.
Companies then faced largely the same issues as they do today.

 

[Revoltingest]

The problem of Identifying the best worker may be due to the Dunning Kruger effect. Mentioned previously.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
At least it would tend to continue the status quo.

No, in a capitalist system there is great variation in the numerous companies existing & continually created.
(And there are many more difficulties than the incompetent overestimating their own competence.)
I've seen great differences in hiring practices by companies, & they often facilitate success, or even result in failure.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

No, in a capitalist system there is great variation in the numerous companies existing & continually created.
(And there are many more difficulties than the incompetent overestimating their own competence.)
I've seen great differences in hiring practices by companies, & they often facilitate success, or even result in failure.

Have you heard of the John Lewis partnership.
Many years ago,when clearly in his last days, he established a partnership for all his employees Who became shareholder owners of his company.
It was an extreemly tightly written legal partnership, and has become the most successful high end retail depatment store and supermarket group in the Uk. It is famous for its very high quality, service, and guarantee policy.

You never have problems if you buy from them, that they do not solve immediatly. You are never out of pocket.
Even then they will always price match branded goods.
Their staff (partners) are paid above the going rate and also recieve a share of proffits at years end, usually of about one third of their salary. But depending on the actual proffit made. They alo invest in the future, with new stores placed in all the best high income areas.
They recently took the massive prime site, in the major new railway station complex in Birmingham.

You will never see them in stock market reports as none of their shares can escape into the wild.

It is a rare example of a capitalist alternative system that has lasted and continued to grow since late victorian times.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Well, I don't see both men and women walk the streets topless in USA!
I won't comment on my preference

 

[Curious George]

Well, I don't see both men and women walk the streets topless in USA!
I won't comment on my preference

Free the nipple?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Free the nipple?

I... didn't say anything

 

[Revoltingest]

Have you heard of the John Lewis partnership.
Many years ago,when clearly in his last days, he established a partnership for all his employees Who became shareholder owners of his company.
It was an extreemly tightly written legal partnership, and has become the most successful high end retail depatment store and supermarket group in the Uk. It is famous for its very high quality, service, and guarantee policy.

You never have problems if you buy from them, that they do not solve immediatly. You are never out of pocket.
Even then they will always price match branded goods.
Their staff (partners) are paid above the going rate and also recieve a share of proffits at years end, usually of about one third of their salary. But depending on the actual proffit made. They alo invest in the future, with new stores placed in all the best high income areas.
They recently took the massive prime site, in the major new railway station complex in Birmingham.

You will never see them in stock market reports as none of their shares can escape into the wild.

It is a rare example of a capitalist alternative system that has lasted and continued to grow since late victorian times.

Nothing succeeds like success.
And their survival in the marketplace speaks to their model's being an optimal solution.
Oh, glorious capitalism!

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, I don't see both men and women walk the streets topless in USA!
I won't comment on my preference

This prompted me to check on RF's prohibition of pix of topless men.
It's gone! No fanfare greeted this welcome change.
(Mods used to delete my pix of @Wirey, who bears an uncanny resemblance to Fabio.)

You guys really need an experienced technical writer who also drafts up contracts.

 

[Emi]

On women not being included for being different to men: I would stand against this, because it specifically excludes women simply because they are women. A person's gender should not be regarded in including them.

As for women and men being exactly the same: neither group is homogenous by even the most elastic stretch of the imagination, so the statement is essentially meaningless.



Well, it was pretty good. Big city, lots to engage in, some nice temples, a nice Triratna Buddhist Centre. The chaplaincy was easy to engage with. Quite a few parks, although not as green as some other cities I've been to (or the farm where I grew up). Pretty multicultural - big Pakistani and Middle Eastern community in one of the areas near my house, and the city also has a big Chinese community.

It sounds pretty nice Would you live there again if you could?
I like that there is a Buddhist center, I didn't know that. Thank you very much for telling me

 

[Kirran]

It sounds pretty nice Would you live there again if you could?
I like that there is a Buddhist center, I didn't know that. Thank you very much for telling me

I have little choice on the matter - after my placement year in Cambridge is over, I have one more year at uni there.

Where do you live?

 

[Emi]

I have little choice on the matter - after my placement year in Cambridge is over, I have one more year at uni there.

Where do you live?

Oh, so you are still living there currently then?

I myself live in NJ, US. I've never moved out of state, but I've lived around the world.

 

[Kirran]

Oh, so you are still living there currently then?

I myself live in NJ, US. I've never moved out of state, but I've lived around the world.

No, I'm living in Cambridge for a year, after which I will return to Manchester.

Cool, a little different, I imagine.

I think most British cities have a Triratna Buddhist Centre. Cambridge has one too.

 

[Emi]

No, I'm living in Cambridge for a year, after which I will return to Manchester.

Cool, a little different, I imagine.

I think most British cities have a Triratna Buddhist Centre. Cambridge has one too.

Oh ok, thank you very much for explaining that to me
It is a little different, but not exactly the best kind. Luckily I live near a speedline, so I can travel quite easily into the nearby cities.
That's awesome. I know there are a lot of Hindu temples far north of where I live, but I'm not sure about Buddhist Centres. Have you been inside it before?

 

[SomeRandom]

It's a fair reply. Tumblr feminists are typically the more confrontational, the more seperatist, the more RadFem, Trans-Exclusive. White Academic Liberal Feminists tend to ignore the wage gap or representational gap of black women and latina women (among other things). Straight feminists tend to marginalize LGBTQ feminists. There's plenty of problems that Feminism has within its ranks.

With confidence, however, feminism I can say does not ignore men nor the plights of men and boys (I have a husband and three grown sons). Check the link I posted in my first response, that addresses gender inequality that disadvantages boys and men. And again, I say with confidence that overall feminists have brought these issues to the table.

I can respect your decision to identify as an egalitarian. I see the term for myself as "feminist" to be accurate and humanitarian and for equality for the sexes. Probably because I've been a feminist for close to 40 years now, it's what I know well, and how the movement and the discourse has evolved through the generations.

I'm sure you're right. Feminism is large and diverse, there are bound to be bad apples.

But I guess because I have watched the implosion of stupidity that is Gamergate (and stayed the hell out of because I thought it was inane, though I agree that gaming media should have ethical standards) I've been rather soured by it all. Even as a neutral I have been dragged into the foray, spoken for without agreeing with said spokesperson and even accused of internalized sexism for liking games like Bayonetta and simply wanting to play games without caring about identity issues. The entire experience has left me feeling alienated and just wanting to find a more friendly atmosphere amongst my fellow equality fighters. I readily admit that those who attacked me are extremists and do not speak for the entire movement. So this is not so much a logical decision as it is fuelled by emotion and just a sense of exhaustion on my part.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I know that threads like this one usually hit a dead end on these forums, but I couldn't help but shudder at the sight of its getting as many likes as it has. The claim that feminism is not needed in the first world in general is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to start. Yes, feminism is needed in countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc., more than the U.S., Sweden, or New Zealand, for example, but that doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that feminism is not needed in the latter as well.

• Every 107 seconds, an American is sexually assaulted.

• In the United States, 98 out of every 100 rapists don't receive any punishment.

• Sweden, New Zealand, and Belgium—the three of which are first-world countries with very high standards of living—have some of the highest rape rates in the world.

• Three women are murdered every day by a current or former male partner in the U.S.

• 85% of the victims of domestic violence in the United States are women.

• In France, 100% of women have been victim of some kind of sexual harassment on public transport.

• A domestic violence incident is recorded every ten minutes in Scotland with 53,681 incidents reported in 2008-9.

And the list goes on and on, and I didn't even touch on the different sexist and misogynistic attitudes and notions that many people hold in societies of more than one first-world country. Listing all or even most of the statistics from different (developed) countries would require volumes.

Laws don't magically change people's attitudes or the social status quo. Laws mean very little without a change in social attitudes. Under Egyptian law, rape is a capital crime, but good luck reporting it or getting the rapist successfully convicted. Looking at some laws even in many third-world countries in isolation of social attitudes, one would think women were treated much better than they actually are. There are laws against rape and sexual assault in the United States and other developed countries, but the statistics above are just a glimpse of how things are in reality.

I think that saying feminism is not needed in the first world requires either a lack of sufficient awareness of statistics concerning the treatment of women in many parts of the first world or a willingness to dismiss or overlook said statistics for whatever reason.

 

[Revoltingest]

I know that threads like this one usually hit a dead end on these forums, but I couldn't help but shudder at the sight of its getting as many likes as it has. The claim that feminism is not needed in the first world in general is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to start. Yes, feminism is needed in countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc., more than the U.S., Sweden, or New Zealand, for example, but that doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that feminism is not needed in the latter as well.

• Every 107 seconds, an American is sexually assaulted.

• In the United States, 98 out of every 100 rapists don't receive any punishment.

• Sweden, New Zealand, and Belgium—the three of which are first-world countries with very high standards of living—have some of the highest rape rates in the world.

• Three women are murdered every day by a current or former male partner in the U.S.

• 85% of the victims of domestic violence in the United States are women.

• In France, 100% of women have been victim of some kind of sexual harassment on public transport.

• A domestic violence incident is recorded every ten minutes in Scotland with 53,681 incidents reported in 2008-9.

And the list goes on and on, and I didn't even touch on the different sexist and misogynistic attitudes and notions that many people hold in societies of more than one first-world country. Listing all or even most of the statistics from different (developed) countries would require volumes.

Laws don't magically change people's attitudes or the social status quo. Laws mean very little without a change in social attitudes. Under Egyptian law, rape is a capital crime, but good luck reporting it or getting the rapist successfully convicted. Looking at some laws even in many third-world countries in isolation of social attitudes, one would think women were treated much better than they actually are. There are laws against rape and sexual assault in the United States and other developed countries, but the statistics above are just a glimpse of how things are in reality.

I think that saying feminism is not needed in the first world requires either a lack of sufficient awareness of statistics concerning the treatment of women in many parts of the first world or a willingness to dismiss or overlook said statistics for whatever reason.

Instead of overlooking anything, there's another perspective.
You see crimes against women, but they're crimes against people, of all genders.
(Notice how I use "all" in preference to "both".)
Let some be feminists, some be masculinists, & others be egalitarians.
All can coexist & be productive in advancing peace & equality.