Female traffic lights

[sudodds]

We can encourage women to go into STEM jobs, but we cannot force them to do so. Men and women are different and on the whole have different interests. Just because we don't have exactly 50/50 of men and women in computer science, for example, that does not mean women are being oppressed - it simply means more women are choosing to pursue other careers that interest them.

Oh I 100% agree (EDIT: on the subject of personal choice) - I would never for the life of me choose a STEM option. I honestly can't imagine anything worse (sorry Jamon). However to act as if this is a purely choice based issue I think is too black and white (I also think that the reverse argument is too black and white mind you). There are systemic, environmental factors that influence the paths individuals want to take - I wasn't born wanting to join the film industry. Jamon wasn't born wanting to be an electrical engineer - and I don't think it is a coincidence that traditionally a gender based redirection of labour has occurred. Along with this, gender roles play a significant factor. Studies have suggested that when it comes to selling ourselves to prospective employers, women tend to sell themselves short, whereas men sell themselves high. Men are more likely to feel comfortable telling a few white lies or exaggerating on a CV, whereas women tend to downplay their achievements in fear of coming across as too conceited. This is at least in some capacity a result of gender conditioning, and may be a significant reason as to why many women choose to take on jobs that are traditionally not as "hard" (I hate saying that), because they don't feel that they are as qualified (I know that these are generalisations, but thats what all studies show. If you want more personal stuff you're gonna have to rely on anecdotes  )

But lets accept your argument for a second okay. Lets say that women are being disproportionately encouraged (not forced - that isn't a thing that is happening) to join STEM fields. Gender based occupational discrimination is still undeniably occurring. For example within the film industry (as that is the goal I have done quite a bit of research on this stuff). There IS a disproportionate amount of successful male directors, and this is not because women traditionally don't want to take on that role. If you look at more "indie" and short films, the gap shrinks significantly. The thing is that in the film industry, male directors are often given the opportunity (and the budgets) to direct MASSIVE films, after maybe one or two successful shorts/"indies," whereas a female director, with many (sometimes even better/more) films and awards is less likely to be given this opportunity, and get stuck in the indie cycle. This is gender based occupational discrimination. It's not a myth.

I don't think when feminists say they want equality in the workforce they mean an exactly 50/50 split between men and women. At the end of the day, it is stupid to ignore factors such as personal choice. They more so want to give everyone an even playing field in being able to access these fields. It is highly likely that many women would find it difficult to join these STEM fields without the introduction of these programs, scholarships and quotas - I mean that is why they are put there in the first place. The fact that many uni's and workplaces are taking such measures to ensure higher rates of female acceptance says to me that at the very least it was a problem for quite some time. The picture Russ posted earlier sums this up perfectly.

[peterpiper]

With all the talk of feminism and political correctness "gone mad", I honestly believe that if you believe in the rights that you have -- you are in part a feminist, and it's not such a bad thing to accept as what most (I believe) people make it out to be.

Political correctness is a way to encourage and challenge us to be more thoughtful, and the ideal of it is so that we can build a more equal and accepting society. And feminist theories contribute to this just as much. Feminism is more than what you see at face-value, it's the history beneath it, it's the idealism behind it. And I think there is something to be admired about that, even when there are so many associations now-a-days with feminists as being these anti-authoritarian hypocrites. I think that if you seriously justify your stance with these stereotypes in mind, I'd say it's probably high time you challenge that too.

[jamonwindeyer]

Jamon wasn't born wanting to be an electrical engineer

I didn't know it when I was born, but on my 10th birthday...

[sudodds]

I didn't know it when I was born, but on my 10th birthday...

(Image removed from quote.)

did I 100% fully anticipate that you would make a meme out of that sentence and that is why I included it? We will never know 

[jamonwindeyer]

did I 100% fully anticipate that you would make a meme out of that sentence and that is why I included it? We will never know 

Ahahaha! My meme game is predictable, it's why Brenden and Jake handle most of the Facebook meme efforts

[EEEEEEP]

Having read all the comments here.. I can see where everyone is coming from and everything has already been said... so I propose a solution.

Why not just make a sign with a male and a female? (as they say,, why not both)

[Syndicate]

Having read all the comments here.. I can see where everyone is coming from and everything has already been said... so I propose a solution.

Why not just make a sign with a male and a female? (as they say,, why not both)

I haven't read most of the comments, so please pardon me for a that.

TBH it shouldn't even matter in the end... those lights are there for only one sole purpose... for a person to cross the road safely, not to show that a certain gender is superior, or anything else pertaining to gender equality. Most of the population wouldn't care if they see a male or a female or anything else on those lights, as long as they feel safe crossing the road.

As for the pay gap (or whatever it is called), you must recall that those are the average wages, and several factors do affect a person's wage (from experience to all the way to other qualities of the person). I do agree that males may have been considered superior in the past, which is why there might be more experienced males in professional fields, but you also have to consider that females are relatively new to those fields (on average). There are several females out there getting the highest pay cheque... why? because of their experience. On average there might be more experienced males in a field compared to females, which is why such a pay gap exists today. You should also notice that as more females are becoming experienced in a certain field, their average wage is also increasing, and catching up. I don't know why people would even compare that wages of a female and a male, because I think a person's gender would have no effect on their wage (in any highly qualified jobs). TBH these days, it doesn't exactly matter what gender you are in any professional field, it your qualities and your experience that matters.

[peterpiper]

I haven't read most of the comments, so please pardon me for a that.

TBH it shouldn't even matter in the end... those lights are there for only one sole purpose... for a person to cross the road safely, not to show that a certain gender is superior, or anything else pertaining to gender equality. Most of the population wouldn't care if they see a male or a female or anything else on those lights, as long as they feel safe crossing the road.

I can't help but notice how you downplay the significance of it. Call me sensitive, but of course it matters. To many people it does mean something. Sure, it's not a fiesta; sure it may seem menial to some. But just because it doesn't involve you doesn't mean it shouldn't matter. It's a symbol for moving forward. It may be brief but it's significance has value, just as much as the function of a street light has a purpose.

I don't know why people would even compare that wages of a female and a male, because I think a person's gender would have no effect on their wage (in any highly qualified jobs). TBH these days, it doesn't exactly matter what gender you are in any professional field, it your qualities and your experience that matters.

The gender pay-gap is only used to highlight that there exists a prejudice, which I think you've summed up only to some extent by your interpretation of the statistics. However, there are also many other more qualitative evidence which supports that women are discriminated against in workplaces, at home etc -- and that these experiences are caused from cultures of what used to be male-dominated. I get where you're going with the meritocratic argument, but there are many more factors contributing to why it's important to think about these things, the female experience etc., so I don't think that it is accurate to say that it "doesn't exactly matter what gender you are" in the real world, when it is shown time and time again that it does affect deeply on how people view you: for a change in perspective, see transgendered people for example and what they have to deal with. While their experiences are arguably drastically different, we could hypothesise that who you identify as, what your sex is, has dramatic effects on your life, and that includes also how your employer chooses to pay you. This sense that you should be who you were born enforces unhealthy stereotypes as well as arguably sexist notions of who you are just because you were born female or male. These same beliefs are ones which helped build what we call and know to be a 'patriarchal society'. You've probably heard what has been said by so many feminists and yet dismissed as a whole because they were "self-justifying" and weren't even "lived by those who preach it" -- the lines "feminists are fighting for equality not just women rights".

Feminism started as a rebellion against what was standard -- what they wore, who they should be, how they should act -- it was a rebellion not because they thought society owed them something, but they were fighting for what we now consider to be a basic human right: the right to self-expression in what was  -- when the first suffrage movement came about -- a time of huge bourgeois restraint. I think feminism does branch out to voicing in a broad sense, the minorities' experiences in terms of what it bred during the 20th Century: the civil rights movement, LGBTI+ communities, and to some extent multi-culturalism. In 20th Century literature for example, you get authors voicing from different backgrounds emerging, queers, immigrants and many more women writers who were deeply involved with the suffrage movement: all of which had one goal which was to express something completely different to what has been established in the canon: what was the past, what was heavily focussed on male-dominated experiences. So in the sense that I've laid out, while their ( the feminists') priorities seem to lie in the direction of women and their rights, it's also about re-examining other more minute details that impact how any one individual may be affected, whether it be the colour of their skin, what they wear, what religion they worship, and their gender (which is the big issue of why I'm writing this). The reason behind it was to change and revolutionise what could have been better for those left in the dark, not to antagonise authorities smugly, but to challenge them and create a better place from when they first found it.

I hope that gives you some insight.

[Syndicate]

I can't help but notice how you downplay the significance of it. Call me sensitive, but of course it matters. To many people it does mean something. Sure, it's not a fiesta; sure it may seem menial to some. But just because it doesn't involve you doesn't mean it shouldn't matter. It's a symbol for moving forward. It may be brief but it's significance has value, just as much as the function of a street light has a purpose.

Key word: most

I also do agree with you saying that it may be significant to some, but I was referring to the population collectively. Not every female is a feminist, and not every male is an oppressor. There are people who believe they are superior in their relationship, and then there are people who believe they are equal in their relationship.

The gender pay-gap is only used to highlight that there exists a prejudice, which I think you've summed up only to some extent by your interpretation of the statistics. However, there are also many other more qualitative evidence which supports that women are discriminated against in workplaces, at home etc -- and that these experiences are caused from cultures of what used to be male-dominated. I get where you're going with the meritocratic argument, but there are many more factors contributing to why it's important to think about these things, the female experience etc., so I don't think that it is accurate to say that it "doesn't exactly matter what gender you are" in the real world, when it is shown time and time again that it does affect how people view you: for a change in perspective, see transgendered people for example and what they have to deal with. While their experiences are arguably drastically different, we could hypothesise that who you identify as, what your sex is, has dramatic effects on your life, and that includes also how your employer chooses to pay you. Just something to think about.

Again, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent. When I asserted "it doesn't matter what gender you are", I was referring to those highly-paid jobs. In such areas, both men and women are a lot more educated, and know how to respect each other. I am also not saying that every man  respects every other woman or vice versa, but that a better sense of equality is established in such areas.

You also can't just say women are the only ones victim to such discrimination, there are other men who are living in such ways as well.

I am not that good at debating, so please do correct me if I am wrong (I am also not targeting anyone, I am just sharing my opinion, and my opinion may be different to a lot of people here).

[elysepopplewell]

Is the only reason that people want female traffic lights because they're offended or feel women are being victimised or discriminated against somehow? Yes. See how their reasoning is all based on feelings and emotions?

This was not a feminist NGO that lobbied for the change - no one felt like a victim. Trust that these sensitive women who can't see facts because their emotions are in the way, aren't actually lobbying for the traffic lights. They're lobbying for anti-FGM, marriage equality, equal opportunities, etc (hint: based on facts). Do they oppose the lights? Likely not. But I've heard lots of my feminist companions say that they'd rather the money be spent else where, although they are keen on the conversation about gender bias. It is the Committee of Melbourne attempting to make a quirky little change to the city that doubles as a prompt to challenge gender bias. I'm in many feminist circles who are really vocal about a lot of things - and no one has once cried to be a victim of a traffic light. I think you are assuming there is a group of people who wanted this changed for personal reasons, when really, the main lobby group wanted the change for the non-emotional, non-personal, non-feeling-based, purpose of making a quirky small change to add to the inclusive "vibe" of Melbourne.

[peterpiper]

Key word: most

Again, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent. When I asserted "it doesn't matter what gender you are", I was referring to those highly-paid jobs. In such areas, both men and women are a lot more educated, and know how to respect each other. I am also not saying that every man  respects every other woman or vice versa, but that a better sense of equality is established in such areas.

You also can't just say women are the only ones victim to such discrimination, there are other men who are living in such ways as well.

I am not that good at debating, so please do correct me if I am wrong (I am also not targeting anyone, I am just sharing my opinion, and my opinion may be different to a lot of people here).

No, you're not offending anyone (at least not me)! It's good to talk about these things, because politics is rarely discussed. It's good that you're contributing to a topic that is often misrepresented. I'm not a good debater, in fact I shy away when given the opportunity because I'm just not naturally good at it. But this is a space where we can comfortably exchange some of our beliefs, and it just so happens that I feel quite strongly about topics such as this!


I'm being a bit idealistic with the way I said that: the way that you said "most people" seemed to me like you were suggesting that since no one cares about it, why bother? - kind of argument. So I thought at the time that I should comment on that. I understand now that what you meant to say was that some people find it meaningful and some people don't, which I agree as with many things really haha.

I didn't say that only women are victims to these discriminations. As I've highlighted with transgendered people, it's something that affects a spectrum of people, so that includes men also - as men can be minorities as well. But that shouldn't mean we should ignore the problem with discrimination against women, and the minority-like status they hold in society. You can read above from what I've added to my post, on what feminism in my opinion, really stands for.

Also, just because men and women are more educated in the higher-end job positions, doesn't necessarily equate to there being a stronger sense of equality. In fact, i would argue that the demands of such a high-position job would encourage sexist behaviours against female coworkers. For example at ANU, they reported that med-students/junior doctors across Australia experience an overwhelming amount of bullying, harassment and humiliation in their time at hospitals. This is also especially true for many academia institutions. (I have like four aunties who were in the field of academia who left research because of the amount of bullying they had experienced from their male colleagues). Just because someone by society's standards are intelligent doesn't necessarily equate them to empathetic beings.

To personally engage in this I have a story, which might interest you:

I knew a woman who was highly established in her career and very career-driven (her CV was impressive af; helped fund medical programs, was a distinguished and prized member of the board of UoM, VCA and NGV, was on multiple boards of cancer research institutions including peter mac). When asked about her retirement, she said something along the lines that working was the hardest and that she was relieved by the change in pace of her life in retirement. She commented on the excessive amount of bullying she had to experience and at times fell into depression because she felt inadequate and isolated -- many of the people she met didn't want her friendship because she was too high-strung for a woman, too "manly". She commented that it was hard mostly because of the amount of pressure she had put on herself as being a woman in the business-commerce sector, to the point where it was exhaustive.

Though this experience in particular was one that spanned many decades and different 'times', she also said that the changes in today's society have been for the better, but it is something that needs to still be addressed. History is never quite over, even when you think it's been decades past its expiration. You see it in Trump's America: there's an article of it here for you if you want to read about it, which takes on a more historical-based analysis of victim politics, and how beliefs that were once dominant, do have their resonance and can bubble back up the surface when we're not careful. So it's still a duty from the past that we be aware of feminism and support it for what it stands for. Not what we think it's become ie. man-hating and victim-playing institutions to be bluntly put. There has been a lot of progress for the better, no doubt. But it doesn't mean we should stop there, because there is still cause for the belief to be heard and discussed about. I am quite critical about the way in which some feminists go about propagating feminism, but in hindsight, it doesn't detract the intrinsic value behind such an idea, because the idea if closely examined has merits that concern more than one individual's experience.

https://granta.com/victim-politics/

[stephjones]

Just thought I'd weigh in on the conversation bc I can't sleep so here goes!!

In my opinion, the only thing that is slightly upsetting about the traffic lights is that I'm worried that it might trivialise some other feminism movements, because it's appearing as unimportant and stupid to a lot of people (e.g. that video that was posted a few posts back). I've just seen a lot of claims since the news was released that this was "just another case of feminists acting victimised" or people arguing the pointlessness of modern day feminism, and that's upsetting because there ARE serious issues that need to be taken seriously. But personally, it doesn't truly affect me, and it definitely isn't harming anyone, so why not?

Also in regards to underrepresentation in some courses and jobs, I think it's definitely related to the subliminal messages we're sent as kids, specifically pertaining to gender roles, which ultimately influence us to take certain pathways in life. Growing up, though I may not have been told exactly, "Girl's shouldn't like science", there's a certain social pressure for girls to like certain things, and for boys to like different things (i.e. makeup as opposed to cars). That's obviously very stereotypical, but I feel like it's these social pressures (what we see other girls doing, what magazines/media/movies tell us we should be doing, sometimes what other women in our lives tell us to do) are what ultimately encourage more females to lean towards jobs like nursing, and males to lean towards more STEM jobs. THAT is why representation is important (which is why the traffic lights could honestly be considered a step in the right direction) and THAT is why the celebration of people like Marie Curie and the accomplishments of other progressive and empowering women on IWD is beneficial. I'm not saying we shouldn't celebrate the achievements of men like Edison, but they should be celebrated equally and, honestly, I learnt about Edison and Einstein when I was in primary school, but I had to look up who Rosa Parks was a few years ago, which isn't fair because they're just as important as each other)

Not to mention that feminism movements actually aim to benefit men as well - absolute gender equality would mean the abolishment of gender stereotypes and gender roles, which means there probably WOULD be more males encouraged to go into nursing, and males expressing sensitivity wouldn't be bullied for doing so, and domestic abuse against males wouldn't be such a taboo thing to talk about! (@Emma Watson's HeForShe campaign!!!)

Anyway, I absolutely agree that the traffic light situation is definitely stimulating a lot of necessary conversations, so it's a positive in that regard! 

[elysepopplewell]

Just thought I'd weigh in on the conversation bc I can't sleep so here goes!!

In my opinion, the only thing that is slightly upsetting about the traffic lights is that I'm worried that it might trivialise some other feminism movements, because it's appearing as unimportant and stupid to a lot of people (e.g. that video that was posted a few posts back). I've just seen a lot of claims since the news was released that this was "just another case of feminists acting victimised" or people arguing the pointlessness of modern day feminism, and that's upsetting because there ARE serious issues that need to be taken seriously. But personally, it doesn't truly affect me, and it definitely isn't harming anyone, so why not?

Thanks for sharing Steph! Welcome to the non-HSC of the forums I agree, it is my main concern here that people are attributing this to the work of feminists in a way that trivialises the enormity of other issues they fight for. It's not like feminists had a choice "do we get traffic lights or do we eradicate FGM? Mmm, let's go for the traffic lights because we're victims." It's not that at all...

I think we are on the same wave length!

[peterpiper]

Just thought I'd weigh in on the conversation bc I can't sleep so here goes!!

In my opinion, the only thing that is slightly upsetting about the traffic lights is that I'm worried that it might trivialise some other feminism movements, because it's appearing as unimportant and stupid to a lot of people (e.g. that video that was posted a few posts back). I've just seen a lot of claims since the news was released that this was "just another case of feminists acting victimised" or people arguing the pointlessness of modern day feminism, and that's upsetting because there ARE serious issues that need to be taken seriously. But personally, it doesn't truly affect me, and it definitely isn't harming anyone, so why not?

Interesting you should point that out. I'm saddened by the effect it has had too on my fb feed and wonder whether it really was a good idea to do it in the first place. But I believe like you that it was something positive, and if it were to elicit negative reactions from people, it's bound to occur anyway. Which means we have a problem that will not stop unless we can ALL communicate in a more agreeable way.

I'm a guy, and I know a bunch of guys who like meninist memes and believe that the cause of feminism is nonsense and they refuse to acknowledge that there is anything logical about identifying as a feminist. And to me, there's nothing more saddening seeing how polarised we are becoming when it comes to trying to attempt to even communicate (not even persuade) to a person of a different opinion other than our own. I have many friends who cannot stand religious people because of their stance against gay marriage, immediately dismissing them as infringing on the rights of many (which makes me sad also; the dismissal that is); I have many friends who I've said above, like these very damaging posts and not even realise what subtler message it carries. It's happening in America, and it's happening here, where no one can empathise with the other, because of the strong emotional attachment people make with these issues. I agree they are very sensitive because it deals with people's experiences, but it's coming to the point where ideas like feminism are perpetuated in magazines whose only readership seem to be those whose beliefs already align with the editor or the ethos of the magazine. What we need is communication, a bridge where we can perhaps have the potential to understand these important issues, and make a deliberately rational and empathetic decision to always be open and discuss it as frequently as possible.

I don't think issues or ideas should label you; but rather, they are utilities, tools for us to use to help us become more empathetic as a society.

[vcestressed]

Again, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent. When I asserted "it doesn't matter what gender you are", I was referring to those highly-paid jobs. In such areas, both men and women are a lot more educated, and know how to respect each other. I am also not saying that every man  respects every other woman or vice versa, but that a better sense of equality is established in such areas.

As for the pay gap (or whatever it is called), you must recall that those are the average wages, and several factors do affect a person's wage (from experience to all the way to other qualities of the person). I do agree that males may have been considered superior in the past, which is why there might be more experienced males in professional fields, but you also have to consider that females are relatively new to those fields (on average). There are several females out there getting the highest pay cheque... why? because of their experience. On average there might be more experienced males in a field compared to females, which is why such a pay gap exists today. You should also notice that as more females are becoming experienced in a certain field, their average wage is also increasing, and catching up. I don't know why people would even compare that wages of a female and a male, because I think a person's gender would have no effect on their wage (in any highly qualified jobs). TBH these days, it doesn't exactly matter what gender you are in any professional field, it your qualities and your experience that matters.

Hey, I'm really interested in this part. You are saying that the wage gap doesn't really matter in highly-paid jobs, right? Where are the statistics?
(I'm not trying to pick on you or anything, just interested in knowing how you concluded this.)