Australia is run by men - what does that say about us?

[Sine]

You raised the topic of gender constructs in the first place? And adding "lololololol" to the start of your post is really not debating in the spirit of the thread - No one is laughing at your opinions. Please don't laugh at theirs.

Fair enough (as a note - lol doesn't really mean laughing anymore it's more of a conjunction )

Did I bring it up? It was mentioned previously no? I spoke about how those who previously believed very strongly that there are 70+ genders are talking about 2 at the moment. Like user : suddods says it's just semantics but I find it annoying having people do backflips (after arguing so passionately). (although it's okay to change opinion)

[sudodds]

One ideology in feminism - support all genders.
Another ideology in feminism - empower women.

When you're arguing for a 50-50 representation between males and females in politics, what you're doing is denying the existence of other genders. What about non-binary people and trans people? What about people who don't identify with a gender? What about people who are somewhere in between? What about people who are gender-questioning? Not that I believe in any of these so-called genders but in general feminists do.

I'm not arguing for 50-50 representation - I'm not an idealist, I just think that womens voices need to be more accurately portrayed in politics. And as I said in my post I'm not denying their existence? This is straw-manning and semantics. I DO think that trans/non-binary individuals deserve representation, particularly in policy matters that are pertinent to them. However trans/non-binary individuals represent a very small percentage of the population in comparison to women. Does that make them any less important individually? No. Does that mean that they don't deserve to be included in politics/discussion? No. However it would be silly to suggest that the argument here is in any way balanced. The vast majority of people identify with the gender they were assigned at birth - girl or boy. So only focusing on this dichotomy makes sense when discussing the issue of unbalanced representation in politics between men and women.

Fair enough (as a note - lol doesn't really mean laughing anymore it's more of a conjunction )

Did I bring it up? It was mentioned previously no? I spoke about how those who previously believed very strongly that there are 70+ genders are talking about 2 at the moment. Like user : suddods says it's just semantics but I find it annoying having people do backflips (after arguing so passionately). (although it's okay to change opinion)

I think he means your point about inconsistency, which was what I was referring too. Like I said, I don't think people were doing backflips, that was what I intended to get across, not necessarily rehash an old argument

[peterpiper]

@gemini I don't mean any disrespect, but it seems like most of your concerns are to do with protecting the state from the plague that is the general public perception of your 'feminists'. You haven't actually engaged very well with what are some very good points raised by members here imo

Two questions, because I want to see your position on this clearly:

Do you actively deny the fact that there is a subconscious gendered bias in society? If so, at what point do you disagree with there being such a thing?

Do your concerns mostly come from your belief that sexism against women is a heavily mythologised concept? If so, what evidence do you have to support this?

Yes. 100 years ago. 100. This is 2017. We don't tell people anymore that they can't be this or that because they're a woman. It's not the 19th century anymore. We don't live in the Victorian era where women were meant to be all proper. We live in 2017 where women are in just about every single job that exists, and we're still complaining. When will it ever be good enough for these feminists? When we get 50-50 in politics? Is that when it'll be good enough? Because some people just don't want to go into politics. I think it's boring. A lot of people I know (my friends, who are all female since I go to a girls school) want to do other jobs. The idea of politics simply doesn't appeal to them. It's a dry job, in a lot of people's opinion, and most of my friends want to get into medicine, which is much more exciting for us.

Well, there's much less than 100% male, and people are having a hissy fit.

Just because it's 2017 doesn't mean that our problems from the past just vanish. We are allowed to be discontented; in fact, I'd have that over complacency. How will we enforce equality if there wasn't such a motivation? Humans (and I say this very generally, but it's true) are strongly susceptible to confirmation bias, and to have our beliefs challenged/policed by notions like being pc, keeps racism, and other forms of discrimination at bay. Furthermore, I also don't think that making a comparison between Victorian society and today's society justifies your point in there being no reason for "feminists" to have a "hissy fit".

EDIT: sorry I realise I sound v. harsh. But there were some really good points raised by The Raven and appleandbee which you didn't address. Like why do you think 50-50 representation in parliament is not a good idea? The Raven's argument pretty much ruled out your meritocratic argument, and appleandbee points out that it doesn't necessarily promote mediocrity in the work that is being performed. Rather, it encourages the erasure of biases in certain workplaces; and in a field such as politics, this is vitally important. Evidence as far as I'm concerned show that the realm of politics is highly dominated by men, and are patriarchal in its general airs. And it is absurd to say that we should just leave it at that, because people are now as you speculatively pointed out not susceptible to subconscious gendered biases, because no one has been outwardly sexist towards you. I find it hard to argue against appleandbee, unless of course, you believe there is no such biases that discriminate against women, which evidence would find you in a bit of a pickle...All you've done is anecdotally shown how women are treated equally among counterparts through direct experience, which isn't very indicative of like 99% of the experiences of other women out there. Which leads me to believe that you're not quite sold with the statistics as well as the qualitative evidences that support the minority-like status of women in society today. Which I think - if I'm right -is speculative at best.

[geminii]

@gemini I don't mean any disrespect, but it seems like most of your concerns are to do with protecting the state from the plague that is the general public perception of your 'feminists'. You haven't actually engaged very well with what are some very good points raised by members here imo
EDIT: sorry I realise I sound v. harsh. But there were some really good points raised by The Raven and appleandbee which you didn't address.

First of all, I have a few SACs coming up next week and I can't reply to every single post on here or else I'd be here all day. I'm replying to randomly selected posts.

Do you actively deny the fact that there is a subconscious gendered bias in society? If so, at what point do you disagree with there being such a thing?

I'll certainly acknowledge that there may well be subconscious gender bias in society, I'm not denying that. But I have not seen any proof of this 'unconscious bias'. If we are to find a way to eliminate unconscious bias, I need a plan that you have for getting rid of it. I need specific examples of proven unconscious bias.

The problem with unconscious bias is that it cannot be proven. The whole point of unconscious bias is, that it's a thought that you don't even know that you're having. That's why it's unconscious bias as opposed to conscious bias. So how are we supposed to stop a thought, that, in the first place, you didn't even know you had? How do we know we have these unknown thoughts at all?

This is why unconscious bias cannot be used as a valid reason in a courtroom for someone to have committed a crime. That's why it's never been used in court.

If unconscious bias really does exist - and remember, I certainly acknowledge that it may - I need proof of it. So what I say is, let's focus on the thoughts we individually have, rather than trying to stop thoughts in other people's heads that they may or may not even be having.

Do your concerns mostly come from your belief that sexism against women is a heavily mythologised concept? If so, what evidence do you have to support this?

Yes, I believe sexism against woman barely exists anymore, specifically in Australia and America and other first world countries. Sexism occurs in other countries obviously, like Saudi Arabia, where women cannot drive, and cannot leave the house without their husband's permission and accompaniment. However, sexism against men does exist (source) and it's extremely prevalent in first world countries today. People are constantly calling men out on the tiniest things - telling a woman she looks pretty can now be considered sexist.
One of my main reasons why sexism against females barely exists anymore (in first world countries is that the gender wage gap is a myth. (source 1, source 2)

And now, I'd like to ask you a few questions:
- Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?
- What is your solution to tackling this so-called 'unconscious bias'? Remember, it's not just a thought - it's a thought that you don't even know you're having.
- What is an example of sexism against women in a first world country today? Do you acknowledge that this 'sexism' you claim exists is not as severe as that faced by women in third world countries?
- What are some behaviours that you consider sexist, and why?
- Do you believe sexism against men exists?

[brenden]

Fair enough (as a note - lol doesn't really mean laughing anymore it's more of a conjunction )

It isn't a conjunction, and whilst lol doesn't mean "laughing", starting your first reply with "LOL" clearly indicates you think something is laughable, and writing "lolololol" after directly quoting someone is clearly laughing at them.

I find it annoying having people do backflips (after arguing so passionately). (although it's okay to change opinion)

I am not even fully sure who you're referring to re: the multiple gender argument, but literally no one mentioned it in this thread before you did, so just untrue to say that people have backflipped. Like... if someone says they love all pets, then has a discussion on whether cats v dogs are better... that doesn't mean they no longer like other pets? If someone says they think there are >2 genders, then discuss whether the proportion of men v women in parliament should change... there is literally nothing - that means, absolutely zero - implication that they have backtracked on their earlier position. Saying "men and women should be 50/50 in parliament" in no way implies that men and women are the only genders. Like... If I said "the North Melbourne Football Club should be 100% men", do I imply that women to not exist? (The answer is no...) So if I say "Parliament should be 50% women and 50% men", do I imply that other genders don't exist? (Again... the answer is no).

Seems like you got annoyed over nothing.

[Sine]

It isn't a conjunction, and whilst lol doesn't mean "laughing", starting your first reply with "LOL" clearly indicates you think something is laughable, and writing "lolololol" after directly quoting someone is clearly laughing at them.
I am not even fully sure who you're referring to re: the multiple gender argument, but literally no one mentioned it in this thread before you did, so just untrue to say that people have backflipped. Like... if someone says they love all pets, then has a discussion on whether cats v dogs are better... that doesn't mean they no longer like other pets? If someone says they think there are >2 genders, then discuss whether the proportion of men v women in parliament should change... there is literally nothing - that means, absolutely zero - implication that they have backtracked on their earlier position. Saying "men and women should be 50/50 in parliament" in no way implies that men and women are the only genders. Like... If I said "the North Melbourne Football Club should be 100% men", do I imply that women to not exist? (The answer is no...) So if I say "Parliament should be 50% women and 50% men", do I imply that other genders don't exist? (Again... the answer is no).

Seems like you got annoyed over nothing.

hmmm ok

First topic is trivial at best

Second taken out of context - I agreed it was semantics

[The Raven]

And now, I'd like to ask you a few questions:
- Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?
- What is your solution to tackling this so-called 'unconscious bias'? Remember, it's not just a thought - it's a thought that you don't even know you're having.
- What is an example of sexism against women in a first world country today? Do you acknowledge that this 'sexism' you claim exists is not as severe as that faced by women in third world countries?
- What are some behaviours that you consider sexist, and why?
- Do you believe sexism against men exists?

To think that it is just 'unconscious bias' when we still have things like this happening: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/they-felt-uncomfortable-about-inviting-a-chick-young-libs-accused-of-misogyny-20170426-gvt0fq.html

It's obvious that some political parties still have a woman problem that can't be explained away by mere 'choice' or even 'unconscious' bias. Of course there are women that attain prominent positions in the Liberal party, but overall the representation is pretty awful, especially for a large party that purports to govern for all Australians. Just a quick google search brings up plenty more articles.

Furthermore, I don't think the idea that just because women are oppressed in third world countries means that there aren't any problems here or that those problems are not worth addressing. Of course we should be grateful we live in a largely free and equal society but that should in no way impede us from continuing to find ways to improve people's lives.

While I do believe that there are some aspects of Western society that have become increasingly toxic to men such as divorce courts, the perception of men and childcare, and the arguments used by extreme and often hateful feminist minorities, they similarly don't detract from issues about female representation in parliament. Injustices against men do not detract from injustices against women and probably shouldn't be used to argue that point.

[peterpiper]

And now, I'd like to ask you a few questions:
- Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?
- What is your solution to tackling this so-called 'unconscious bias'? Remember, it's not just a thought - it's a thought that you don't even know you're having.
- What is an example of sexism against women in a first world country today? Do you acknowledge that this 'sexism' you claim exists is not as severe as that faced by women in third world countries?
- What are some behaviours that you consider sexist, and why?
- Do you believe sexism against men exists?

Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?

Haha I'll get back to you when I actually research this fairly. I'll try to give a balanced view on this, because I'm curious myself. As for the validity of the theory, I believe it exists mainly because we're all so human lol, and because of the general trends which we see over in research on media, occupation, statistics which have always been on the affirmative of attitudes which discourage/ discriminate against women; and like in an article I remember reading that reported that of the proportion of women represented in a varying array of ~950 news outlets, an overwhelming majority of them are represented in image than in text. The paper also concluded from the survey**(sorry I haven't found it yet, but I promise it was a legit study) of like 2 million articles that there was a 77% probability that a person written about in text was male, and like 69.6% probability that the image depicting a person was a male. It's nonsensical to argue that this finding isn't significant due to the large sample size they've gathered from; women are under-represented is my firm belief from just that one article, but I am certain there are so many others out there, with even a stronger correlation to argue the case better. I also, think that we can't isolate this with the general trends that have from time to time seen itself exposed ie. conservative attitude toward women and gender roles for example. There are probably hundreds of research out there which seem to point towards some sense that society favours men over women. But I'll get back to you on that if I can remove myself from SACs, and present something at least passable.

Also, it's important to think of subconscious gender bias as a theory to describe a pattern of behaviours that point toward gender imbalanced views from a societal level (?) *I'm not an expert, but that's at least my approximation of what I had in mind when I used it.

But, rather than waiting for my response though, you could do your own research on it as well, since I can't be solely relied on to deliver

What are some behaviours that you consider sexist, and why?
I think sexism, while it can be immediately and directly identified with blatant and highly discriminating behaviours like a person saying someone is incompetent based on only their gender; I think it persists in modern society indirectly through more subtle behaviours which are circumstantial, but have an irrefutable sexist connotation; like in joseph41's article it's worth asking ourselves why it was that the men and their attitudes were favoured above the female student who was asked not to participate because she'd make the guys feel "uncomfortable" etc. So I can't give one example, as there are a plethora of examples, and I don't think specifying and making an example out of one would aid in this particular discussion. Unless, if the discussion was centred on a particular individual's action, than it would be worth exploring; but in this case, I don't think it would contribute much, other than my declaration that something a bit unrelated and removed from the topic is sexist. 

What is an example of sexism against women in a first world country today? Do you acknowledge that this 'sexism' you claim exists is not as severe as that faced by women in third world countries?

If we're looking at severity of sexism, especially with regards to other forms of oppression at play as well, I can't make a fair case either way: we'd be meddling in the realms of ethics, morals, circumstances that are so culturally diverse (like there are just more than one sort of culture in what we call the third-world). Sure, generally, I'd say women in third world countries have a harder time, but I'm suspecting that you're only asking this to devalue the sexism that is apparent in our society, which we reap the benefits from. Just because our lives are generally a lot safer than those in other countries, it doesn't call for a halt in scrutinising other's behaviours and striving for equality in a society that is democratic and liberal in general values.

Do you believe sexism against men exists?

Of course, I don't deny that sexism against men do exist. There are probably many examples of it such as toxic masculinity, gender roles, and others which I can't think of from the top of my head. However, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't also view unjust behaviours toward women with the same gravity.


*I'll try to find the article I was talking about above and will update when I find it***

EDIT: found it: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148434

[sudodds]

Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?
Haha I'll get back to you when I actually research this fairly.

This Harvard study was pretty interesting (and also just a tad depressing)

[Joseph41]

*Up to near the end of the last page - will respond to the rest later (have to work lel)*

LOL

Reading these responses make me feel annoyed at AN. Everyone is so inconsisitent. For example : The same people who proclaimed there are 70 genders are now dividing into 2 . I dont care what anyone believes in and they have a right to believe in anything they want but atleast be consistent. Not just arguing a point when it suits you. SMH

Could you direct me to the posts relevant to this claim? Where have people been inconsistent? Are you referencing my opening post, which merely referenced externally provided statistics?

This this.

What is a "reasonable split"?

SOme industries are highly dominated by males or females.

In nursing, 40% of females would need to be fired
In engineering, over 40% of males would need to be fired or rejected
In housing construction, over 40% of males would need to be fired or rejected..
The list goes on...

(THAT would be discrimination it itself ... or bias towards a gender which is obv bad)... for the sake of equality.
...
112 genders exist according to the safe schools program... idk.. it changes all the time

I don't think this is consistent with arguments presented in this thread. Find me any post that supports firing male politicians. I can't speak on behalf of others, but what I'm arguing isn't that there should be a 50/50 split, but more of a balanced approach to politics in general. The way we raise our children and treat males/females is simply inconsistent, and that plays a role in the gender imbalance I've noted.

Pretty sure that, just because we are discussing males vs females in politics, doesn't mean people have now abandoned other views on gender that may have been raised earlier. That's just not really the discussion right here - And I don't really like what you insinuate about people when you say they are arguing points when it suits them (because I don't think anyone here is doing that)

Yep, agree with this. I feel I've been very consistent with my views, but am happy to be shown the inconsistencies if they're there.

Yeah there are so many contradictions with this whole thing...first people are saying that there are 67 genders - then I heard 76 - and apparently there are 252 according to another source?!?! Okay first of all there are only two genders but that's a discussion for another time.

Where is the contradiction? I'm confused about your contention pertaining to gender, here. Is gender not a social construct (remembering here that gender is very distinct from biological sex)? If this is true, are our conceptions of maleness and femaleness (again, speaking of gender rather than sex) also social constructs? So just because more people identify with those social constructs, what makes them more valid than any others?

If somebody came to me and told me they identified with a third gender, who am I to say they don't? I firmly believe there are more than two genders and I'm very comfortable holding that view. And it's definitely not inconsistent with my opening post.

Someone a while ago asked strawberries why they're not a feminist - I agree with strawberries in this sentiment. I used to be a feminist, and quite a vocal one at that. I believed in the gender wage gap, that women were literally being treated like dirt everywhere around the world (even here - that's what feminists always make it seem like) and that men were literally the Hitlers of the planet. That's what I thought. That's what everyone told me.

It's a shame you were told these things, and I'm sorry that you were. To conflate maleness with those things you've mentioned is obviously unfortunate, and just objectively not the case.

And then I realised something. It started when Donald Trump began trying out for president of the US. I saw my (girls only) school transform from a woman loving school into a man hating school. Everyone was hating on Donald Trump - everyone. Someone, for their art class, drew an obscene picture of him (which was approved by teachers and displayed to parents, mind you) with a you-know-what on his head. Imagine if something like that was drawn on a woman by someone in my school, or any school - the painter would be suspended and the painting definitely not approved. Also, all hell would break loose with cries of 'sexism', 'patriarchy' and 'oppression'. But everyone laughed when they saw Donald Trump painted in that way. Even if it was drawn on a woman that a lot of people dislike - like Pauline Hanson - it would be safe to say that people would assume that the reason why it was drawn on her is because she's a female, not because her policies are disliked.

I'm just not sure that this is true - not at all. If I were walking down the street and saw art similar to what you've mentioned relating to Donald Trump, or Pauline Hanson, or literally any other politician, I wouldn't immediately jump to the conclusion of sexism - irrespective of gender. To do so seems to be a pretty absurd jump. I'm not sure what you're basing these assumptions on, but I'm unconvinced they're reflective of wider society.

According to feminists - when a man is hated, it's because of his behaviour and is perfectly acceptable. But when a woman is hated, God help the person who insulted her because it was an attack on her status as a female and nothing to do with her views. #feministlogic

Source? Examples?

I'm not saying Donald Trump is a good guy. He's said some stupid things. But what I did see during those few months was the true nature of feminism - crying out 'sexism' when something doesn't go your way.

That's why I'm not a feminist. I don't hate men. I don't hate women. I'll like you if I think you're a good person, despite your gender. I'll dislike your viewpoints if I disagree with them, despite your gender. I'll dislike you if I don't think you're a good person, despite your gender.
I'm not a feminist because I'm not going to force you to do a job you don't want to do, just for the sake of having 'equal representation in politics'.[/quote]

I really don't think this is a fair representation of feminism. In fact, forcing women into politics seems distinctly counter-feminism as I understand it.

If politics isn't your thing, whether you're male or female, then, don't do it! Just do you, do whatever you want to do as a job, and stop crying out 'sexism' and 'oppression' because there aren't enough females to your liking in politics. I'm certainly not crying out 'sexism' because there aren't enough male teachers in primary schools (which is also an extremely important job, by the way).

I think it's more complicated than that, though. Like, saying words to the effect of, "do as you please!" is a little simplistic in this domain.

[geminii]

Where is your evidence of unconscious bias? Do you have solid proof of it?

Haha I'll get back to you when I actually research this fairly. I'll try to give a balanced view on this, because I'm curious myself. As for the validity of the theory, I believe it exists mainly because we're all so human lol, and because of the general trends which we see over in research on media, occupation, statistics which have always been on the affirmative of attitudes which discourage/ discriminate against women; and like in an article I remember reading that reported that of the proportion of women represented in a varying array of ~950 news outlets, an overwhelming majority of them are represented in image than in text. The paper also concluded from the survey**(sorry I haven't found it yet, but I promise it was a legit study) of like 2 million articles that there was a 77% probability that a person written about in text was male, and like 69.6% probability that the image depicting a person was a male. It's nonsensical to argue that this finding isn't significant due to the large sample size they've gathered from; women are under-represented is my firm belief from just that one article, but I am certain there are so many others out there, with even a stronger correlation to argue the case better. I also, think that we can't isolate this with the general trends that have from time to time seen itself exposed ie. conservative attitude toward women and gender roles for example. There are probably hundreds of research out there which seem to point towards some sense that society favours men over women. But I'll get back to you on that if I can remove myself from SACs, and present something at least passable.

Also, it's important to think of subconscious gender bias as a theory to describe a pattern of behaviours that point toward gender imbalanced views from a societal level (?) *I'm not an expert, but that's at least my approximation of what I had in mind when I used it.

But, rather than waiting for my response though, you could do your own research on it as well, since I can't be solely relied on to deliver

What are some behaviours that you consider sexist, and why?
I think sexism, while it can be immediately and directly identified with blatant and highly discriminating behaviours like a person saying someone is incompetent based on only their gender; I think it persists in modern society indirectly through more subtle behaviours which are circumstantial, but have an irrefutable sexist connotation; like in joseph41's article it's worth asking ourselves why it was that the men and their attitudes were favoured above the female student who was asked not to participate because she'd make the guys feel "uncomfortable" etc. So I can't give one example, as there are a plethora of examples, and I don't think specifying and making an example out of one would aid in this particular discussion. Unless, if the discussion was centred on a particular individual's action, than it would be worth exploring; but in this case, I don't think it would contribute much, other than my declaration that something a bit unrelated and removed from the topic is sexist. 

What is an example of sexism against women in a first world country today? Do you acknowledge that this 'sexism' you claim exists is not as severe as that faced by women in third world countries?

If we're looking at severity of sexism, especially with regards to other forms of oppression at play as well, I can't make a fair case either way: we'd be meddling in the realms of ethics, morals, circumstances that are so culturally diverse (like there are just more than one sort of culture in what we call the third-world). Sure, generally, I'd say women in third world countries have a harder time, but I'm suspecting that you're only asking this to devalue the sexism that is apparent in our society, which we reap the benefits from. Just because our lives are generally a lot safer than those in other countries, it doesn't call for a halt in scrutinising other's behaviours and striving for equality in a society that is democratic and liberal in general values.

Do you believe sexism against men exists?

Of course, I don't deny that sexism against men do exist. There are probably many examples of it such as toxic masculinity, gender roles, and others which I can't think of from the top of my head. However, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't also view unjust behaviours toward women with the same gravity.


*I'll try to find the article I was talking about above and will update when I find it***

Alright, but you still didn't answer this question (I'll reply in full when I have more time haha

What is your solution to tackling this so-called 'unconscious bias'? Remember, it's not just a thought - it's a thought that you don't even know you're having.

[Joseph41]

Also just a side note: I genuinely appreciate all the responses, here - irrespective of argument. As previously mentioned, it definitely can be difficult to speak your mind!

[peterpiper]

Alright, but you still didn't answer this question (I'll reply in full when I have more time haha

What is your solution to tackling this so-called 'unconscious bias'? Remember, it's not just a thought - it's a thought that you don't even know you're having.

I don't have an all encompassing solution to tackle it, definitively; that's like trying to find a solution to racism; as, if I did, it'd be like something out of 1984 lol. However, what I will say is that if we continue talking about it, then eventually, these biases won't have as much of an effect on us, as we continue the conversation with the decision-making processes we go through.

As for the 50-50 representation in parliament, however, read appleandbee's post; I think they do a better job at explaining the quotas than I could, and why they're effective. This is the point that I'd like to hear with how you differ in opinion, because I think it's sort of hard to disagree with them. Unless of course you think either that there is no such toxic culture that prevents women from finding/choosing a political career or that 50-50 representation is ineffective and only represent women on a superficial sense. If you argue the latter, I think, you'd have to also agree that quotas in general are superficial, which follows that you believe having a quota for indigenous Australians in parliament, is either ineffective or superficial, which I don't agree with.

[strawberries]

a question to the men/males here: how would you feel if your spot, say, in a future career/job, was taken by a woman, not because she was more competent than you, but simply because she was a woman? would you be okay with it? would you feel discriminated against?
obviously, i'm not saying that men are more competent than women in all areas. there are obviously some women more competent than men.

personally, as a woman, I would hate to be told that "oh you're only here cos you're a woman" etc, i want to learn to work hard rather than wait for things to be handed to me
there are plenty of great women to look up to in australian politics (and personally I 'like' more female pollies than male, but that'd just be sexist of me to say that wouldn't it??)




ps. this thread has probably been some of the most controversial things i've publicly posted. i respect all of your views/discussion, and i am sorry if i have offended anyone, man or woman. i honestly think you're all great people and nothing, your gender, should stop you from achieving your dreams, whether it be in politics or elsewhere
and i am also sorry to any women/girls here in particular, who have been told that they "couldn't" do things because they're female

[Sine]

Also just a side note: I genuinely appreciate all the responses, here - irrespective of argument. As previously mentioned, it definitely can be difficult to speak your mind!

RIP when I get downvoted