Go on... rape her... she won't report it... [UniLad magazine article]

[toggle]

Oppression is a big word. There are women in the world who really ARE oppressed. Who are not allowed to work, who are forced to cover themselves, who cannot leave the house without their husbands, who are stoned for having an affair. As far as I'm concerned, THAT is oppression.

What we have in this country, at least if you are white (Asian women get a shitter deal ime) is the remnants of sexism. A lot of income disparity comes from women taking career breaks to have and raise kids. Now, I'd like to see it made much easier for women to come back into the job market and earn as much as their male colleagues, but the fact is if you're working part time or haven't had as much experience as the man you are competing with, that aint gonna be the case. That is NOT oppression. To call that oppression is to downgrade the word.

kabbes, the views expressed on urban are (very) left wing, and they are rarely mine. Sometimes I can see the points being made, other times I just disagree *shrugs*

i'd call it oppression that someone could rape me and they would most likely get away with it.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

You include a box on the front of the test that asks the person taking it to fill out their sex.

Merely doing this drops the average female result on a maths test by 5%.

Blimey! I don't suppose you remember the authors so I can search for the study? (not disbelieving you, just interested)

 

[Edie]

It's not some sort of urban bubble Eids, this sort of analysis (oppressed/oppressor class) is commonly accepted across all political and social science discourse.

Ok, well as you were then. Maybe I'm just wrong. I said I was gonna keep out of shit like this anyway

 

[quimcunx]

Blimey! I don't suppose you remember the authors so I can search for the study? (not disbelieving you, just interested)

Similar when black people think their performance will be compared to white people. And when white men have to do some PE which they think will be compared to a black man.

No links. Can't remember where I read/saw it.

 

[_angel_]

You include a box on the front of the test that asks the person taking it to fill out their sex.

Merely doing this drops the average female result on a maths test by 5%.

Bizarre. But I don't think ticking a box would make me more aware of not being a man!

 

[_angel_]

Would this apply to any test or just a Maths one. Just wondering why they felt the need then to make the pass mark for 11 plus 5% higher for girls than boys, if all they had to do was to get people to tick gender box.

 

[5t3IIa]

Math test paper. Steele 1997

When women perform math, unlike men, they risk being judged by the negative
stereotype that women have weaker math ability. We call this predicament stereotype
threat and hypothesize that the apprehension it causes may disrupt women’s math
performance. In Study 1 we demonstrated that the pattern observed in the literature that
women underperform on difficult (but not easy) math tests was observed among a highly
selected sample of men and women. In Study 2 we demonstrated that this difference in
performance could be eliminated when we lowered stereotype threat by describing the test
as not producing gender differences. However, when the test was described as producing
gender differences and stereotype threat was high, women performed substantially worse
than equally qualified men did. A third experiment replicated this finding with a less highly
selected population and explored the mediation of the effect. The implication that
stereotype threat may underlie gender differences in advanced math performance, even

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Bizarre. But I don't think ticking a box would make me more aware of not being a man!

I guess it works by making your "womaness" a little bit more of a significant issue, than it would have otherwise been in that particular situation.

Cheers 5t3lla!

 

[ymu]

Edie, that just isn't true. The most intense discussions here are between posters who have broadly left views. The reason some posts get short shrift is that they're interfering with a much more detailed debate and forcing it to return to basics rather than explore differences in broadly similar outlooks.

There's been loads of times I'm in a raging argument with someone and we're liking each other's posts in a different thread where we do agree.

You miss the nuances because of the simplistic crap that bombastic husband of yours drones into you.

 

[quimcunx]

It's not some sort of urban bubble Eids, this sort of analysis (oppressed/oppressor class) is commonly accepted across the majority of political and social science discourse.

Really?

Oh, did you edit in 'science'?

I'm not sure Edie is talking about political or social science graduates. Most people aren't political or social science graduates. I think she's talking about mates, the local newsagent, workmates, anyone who watches loose women or reads tabloids, family etc.

 

[stethoscope]

I'm not sure Edie is talking about political or social science graduates. Most people aren't political or social science graduates. I think she's talking about mates, the local newsagent, workmates, anyone who watches loose women or reads tabloids, family etc.

But those sorts of relationships are precisely what is not being talked about when we talk about oppressor/oppression. So jumping on VP saying 'he's calling us women oppressed victims' when relating it to an individual or yourself, when we're talking about oppression in regards to societal power relations is missing the point entirely.

 

[quimcunx]

But those sorts of relationships are precisely what is not being talked about when we talk about oppressor/oppression. So jumping on VP saying 'he's calling us oppressed victims' is missing the point entirely.

Wut?


I think I must have missed a vital post somewhere. Maybe I should concentrate on work instead of half'n'half...

I thought we were talking about discourse between social scientists v discourse between 'normal' people.

 

[Edie]

Edie, that just isn't true. The most intense discussions here are between posters who have broadly left views. The reason some posts get short shrift is that they're interfering with a much more detailed debate and forcing it to return to basics rather than explore differences in broadly similar outlooks.

Funnily enough this IS exactly what I meant, what I find frustrating. I don't want to explore differences in broadly similar far-left outlook, when I don't even know if I agree with the broadly similar outlook, or even if a significant number of other people in society do.

But, hey, I do now understand that is what people want to do. And why it's frustrating if they can't and get interrupted. And I'm not menna be discussing politics this time round anyway, so knock yourselves out.

 

[stethoscope]

Wut?


I think I must have missed a vital post somewhere. Maybe I should concentrate on work instead of half'n'half...

I thought we were talking about discourse between social scientists v discourse between 'normal' people.

Well, admittedly because of the political savviness of a lot of posters on here, that's how most stuff gets framed.

But I was responding to what Edie said:

Ladies does anyone here actually FEEL oppressed? Cos I don't This is bullshit, stop calling us bloody oppressed! We live in the UK in 2012, yes there might be a fair way to go before the playing field is level, but VP going round telling us we're all poor little oppressed victims is just fuckin annoying

And that's precisely not what VP is saying at all, because he's not talking about whether individuals of us as women feel oppressed, but power relations/oppression based on gender. So its no good having a go at VP for saying what he actually didn't say. And its a little frustrating because this sort of discussion has been had so many times and it has been explained. But regardless, I was trying to explain how this stuff works/what VP is saying/not!

But even so, I've got a lot of friends/family/acquantances who don't know any political or social science but are able to see that women as a gender are oppressed against, even if in they're own lives they're not.

 

[Blagsta]

Edie - you think its normal for men to use prostitutes. Just goes to show how "normal" can vary eh.

 

[nino_savatte]

Oppression is a big word.

No, it isn't. It's only 4 syllables. It's smaller than "antidisestablishmentarianism".

 

[ymu]

Edie - you think its normal for men to use prostitutes. Just goes to show how "normal" can vary eh.

Depends if you define "normal" as a very large majority attribute to the point where deviance is, erm, deviant - or simply as common enough that it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that it happens.

The former definition isn't terribly useful, as it happens. Is it abnormal to meet a British-Asian person, for example?

 

[Edie]

Edie - you think its normal for men to use prostitutes. Just goes to show how "normal" can vary eh.

See ya. Prick.

(edit: it is absolutely PATHETIC that I can't discuss shit on here without this being thrown in my face and I REALLY can't be fucked no more).

 

[stethoscope]

Anyways, I found out this morning that I am being discriminated against at work, so I am feeling pretty fucking oppressed right now as it goes

 

[quimcunx]

Well, admittedly because of the political savviness of a lot of posters on here, that's how most stuff gets framed.


But even so, I've got a lot of friends/family/acquantances who don't know any political or social science but are able to see that women as a gender are oppressed against, even if in they're own lives they're not.

Me too. But loads of my friends are from here and the sector I work in means my discourse there is very similar. If I compare it to other places I've worked or people I encounter outside of that the discourse is more Edie's style. So in that sense I'd agree there is a bubble.


Anyway, another diversion. I'm going to do some work.

 

[Blagsta]

See ya. Prick.

(edit: it is absolutely PATHETIC that I can't discuss shit on here without this being thrown in my face and I REALLY can't be fucked no more).

Edie - you post stuff that you think in public, its fair game. If you don't want stuff that you write repeated back to you, don't write it.

The point I was making is that our perceptions of what is "normal" is subjective. You think that we all live in a bubble - I think you live in your own bubble.

 

[Blagsta]

Depends if you define "normal" as a very large majority attribute to the point where deviance is, erm, deviant - or simply as common enough that it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that it happens.

The former definition isn't terribly useful, as it happens. Is it abnormal to meet a British-Asian person, for example?

This is my point - our perceptions of "normal" are subjective. For Edie, men using prostitutes is "normal". For me it isn't, but meeting British-Asians is. If you live in a rural village it probably isn't.

 

[ymu]

Anyways, I found out this morning that I am being discriminated against at work, so I am feeling pretty fucking oppressed right now as it goes

A few years after I started a job and the consultants I worked with regularly had worked out that I wasn't there to pour their tea or sort out their expense claims, we had to go to a review committee that was chaired by a doctor who didn't know me. I was the only woman in a room with eight men, and I was over a decade (or two) younger than any of them.

He completely ignored me the whole meeting. I had plenty to add, but no opportunity to speak. Then he asked the lead oncologist why we had chosen that particular chemotherapy dose schedule for the control arm. He couldn't answer. None of the medics could, so it came to my boss. I knew that he knew because he made the decision and explained it to me originally, but he shrugged and said he had no idea. And looked at me. The look on the chair's face when I answered makes up for a lot of shit like this.

Kick some arse at work though, yeah?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ladies does anyone here actually FEEL oppressed? Cos I don't This is bullshit, stop calling us bloody oppressed! We live in the UK in 2012, yes there might be a fair way to go before the playing field is level, but VP going round telling us we're all poor little oppressed victims is just fuckin annoying

Except that's not what I said, Edie.

 

[ymu]

Edie posted a very personal, honest and moving account that added considerable value to the thread it was on. She requested that nobody quote it so that she could change her mind and delete it later. Everybody respected that.

But there seem to be a handful of people who think it's OK to throw it back in her face every time they disagree with her about sexual politics.

Pure cuntery, IMO.

 

[stethoscope]

Kick some arse at work though, yeah?

Ta. Worst of all when you find out its some of those you trusted that have been helping in the shafting

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Edie, that just isn't true. The most intense discussions here are between posters who have broadly left views. The reason some posts get short shrift is that they're interfering with a much more detailed debate and forcing it to return to basics rather than explore differences in broadly similar outlooks.

Patronising bollocks.

Oh yes, the intellectual debates on Urban mustn't be disturbed by thickos who don't have similarly lefty views and who need to have basic things explained to them!

 

[trashpony]

When I used to manage a team which included a number of men in it, on at least two occasions it was assumed by salespeople that the older of the two was in charge. And I've been paid less than male colleagues for doing the same job long before I had children. I was told once that it was 'fair' because I wouldn't have to support a family on my income.

They got that wrong

 

[Blagsta]

Edie posted a very personal, honest and moving account that added considerable value to the thread it was on. She requested that nobody quote it so that she could change her mind and delete it later. Everybody respected that.

But there seem to be a handful of people who think it's OK to throw it back in her face every time they disagree with her about sexual politics.

Pure cuntery, IMO.

Bollocks. Edie was very insistent that prostitution was normal. It may well be for her. It's not for others. I make no value judgements on that.

Are we supposed to treat everything some people say with kid gloves? How are we supposed to know what is ok to refer to and what isn't? If you don't want stuff referred to, don't post it on the internet.

 

[ymu]

Patronising bollocks.

Oh yes, the intellectual debates on Urban mustn't be disturbed by thickos who don't have similarly lefty views and who need to have basic things explained to them!

That is not what I said, although I see the ambiguity. Basics as in the broad left/right division rather than the intra-left (or intra-right) divisions - discussion of which has always been one of the main sustaining features of this board. It started as a protest forum, it became very important over a decade ago as a place for left activists of all stripes to meet and continues to play that role to a much lesser extent since it, inevitably, started to attract a broader audience as the place grew.

There's no beef with the broadening of the site - there are plenty of forums. But you can still expect a lot of debates to come from a left vs left perspective because the vast majority of people posting here are to varying degrees left of centre.

There are plenty of right vs left threads. Sometimes left vs left needs to be allowed to have the discussions they want too.