“I don’t think that people intend harm, for the most part, and just need a comic reminder here and there.”
But if you work in an environment where people are gunning for the same very highly paid, high profile positions - ones that aren’t determined solely by seniority/years of service and knowledge of certain aircraft, but by more subjective criteria - office politics and some “not so nice stuff” does come into play and sexist, undermining comments and behavior, both overt and covert, can be destructive whether intentional or not.
PG, your range of experience is limited. As a faculty member, I was told by my department chair that he had to pay Prof. Y more than he paid me, because Prof. Y had #n children. He was actually opposed to equal pay for equal work. The law of the land. He had argued with one of his post-docs about it, and he told me so (also the name of the post-doc, a man). Later, when I became department chair, I noticed that the salary of a younger woman faculty member had fallen behind where it should be. Her salary had been set for about 10 years by the department chair in question. I mentioned the elements of the conversation to the Dean–edited to add: in the context of requesting a special salary adjustment for her, from the Dean–and said that the former department chair had not believed in equal pay for equal work. The Dean said that he didn’t either. Some days, I like to think that the Dean just mis-heard me, but I am not certain.
I don’t think those of us who successfully interacted with men in our career can necessarily declare the battle for equal treatment over. Just because “you” managed- well, it makes a fine example for your daughters, but the world is still evolving.
And I do find it amusing that some advocate the tough skin (in various phrasing) but jump on a dean who called a young 'un on his word choice.
Can some of you step back and see how judgmental some of this is? A kind of “I managed, what’s wrong with her?”
“If it’s “trivial” to you, then why would you need a “thick skin” to deal with it? Saying other people are overreacting and the things that hurt them are “trivial” is not thick-skinned; it’s oversensitive. Why are you upset that someone else’s feelings are hurt? Why can’t you believe them when they say they are? Why do you insist on blaming women for systemic, institutionalized sexism? Why do you think “just grin and bear it” is a useful approach for anyone other than yourself? Why do other approaches upset you so?”
I am specifically talking about things that are, actually trivial. Like this thread, that specifically talks about overreaction for being called “vivacious”. If you are hurt by any possible thing, then maybe you really are oversensitive. Don’t think I’ve ever said, “grin and bear it”. “Approaches,” where women are making a big deal about nothing, really does hurt the cause of other women who do have serious complaints.
“But more importantly, your anecdata doesn’t extrapolate, and what’s best for an individual isn’t what’s best for a system. Systemic change doesn’t happen because some people had thick skin (interestingly, I read something similar recently from a woman in the 1840s criticizing Elizabeth Cady Stanton and saying she was overreacting by organizing the Seneca Falls Convention!)”
Of course when people are able to do things as an individual, it helps people overall. One small step at a time, anything we can do things ourselves, helps each other. It is not required to join as a group and scream loudly to make a difference. Though sometimes that is very powerful.
“(This conversation would be better if you could learn how to make quote tags. It’s easy. Just use square brackets “[” and “]” and type quote=username inside them. Then at the end of the quote, use the square brackets again and type /quote. Like so:”
I don’t like quote tags. I don’t feel like doing them, and I don’t have to. You have not suggested it in a way that I feel is in a pleasant, constructive manner. So as a powerful woman, I say, kiss my feminist, confident butt!
Well, old history now, marvin100, but not so old, since I was department chair when I spoke with the Dean about the salary adjustment for my younger colleague.
“And @Pizzagirl --sounds like a pretty hostile work environment, if men are encouraged to get “sloshed” and say sexist things to their colleagues. Yikes. You’re lucky that didn’t escalate–serious lawsuits result from interactions like that with some regularity.”
Where did she say that, “Men were encouraged to get sloshed and say sexist things to their collegues?” What kind of BS is that? Life just happens. What kind of interpretive silliness are you attributing to what she said?
Really, this kind of exaggeration does NOT help women who are harassed. Being free and loose with the truth is NOT useful.
Okay, strike “encouraged” and substitute “allowed,” @busdriver11 . Interesting, though, that you’re more indignant about my diction than about the actual sexist behavior under discussion…
"But if you work in an environment where people are gunning for the same very highly paid, high profile positions - ones that aren’t determined solely by seniority/years of service and knowledge of certain aircraft, but by more subjective criteria - office politics and some “not so nice stuff” does come into play and sexist, undermining comments and behavior, both overt and covert, can be destructive whether intentional or not. ’
I think I’m really glad that I don’t have to work in the real world, then. Even though I’m in one of the most male dominated fields around, I do not have to play nice if I don’t want to. And it’s not just union politics, they don’t care. It’s being on a seniority list that gets me a better job. However, it does not get me a management job (that I don’t want).
However, I still don’t think that it helps women to overreact about any possible slight. I think it is helpful to be positive and confident. To deal with something personally when it crosses the line, and to not make a big deal when someone obviously and unintentionally says something that could be interpreted as being remotely sexist.
We can all point to petty sensitivities. Maybe that gal should have gotten past the navigation comment. But that doesn’t prove everything’s hunky dory and that if any woman has an objection, the problem lies with her, she isn’t adequate, she isn’t tough enough, she’s a Silly Milly. Stop and think for a minute.
Fwiw, Patrice used the word sexist.
“I still don’t think that it helps women to overreact about any possible slight” How did we get to “any possible slight” from the objection to vivacious?
"Okay, strike “encouraged” and substitute “allowed,” @busdriver11 . Interesting, though, that you’re more indignant about my diction than about the actual sexist behavior under discussion… "
Maybe that’s because I think the “sexist behavior” that this thread was created for, is trivial and really not even sexist behavior. Did you not get that from my posts?
Another thing that cracks me up is that you are really condescending. I wonder if you’re trying to challenge women who feel that they are strong and powerful, and apparently you would feel better if we declared ourselves as victims. Does that bother you? >:)
“We can all point to petty sensitivities. Maybe that gal should have gotten past the navigation comment. But that doesn’t prove everything’s hunky dory and that if a woman complains, the problem lies with her, she isn’t adequate, she isn’t tough enough, she’s a Silly Milly. Stop and think for a minute.”
I think you are generalizing. I don’t think that anyone is saying that for any possible complaint," the problem lies with her, she isn’t tough enough, she’s a Silly Milly". I think we are talking past each other, and would likely agree on what is egregious and what is trivial.
“I still don’t think that it helps women to overreact about any possible slight” How did we get to “any possible slight” from the objection to vivacious?"
The objection to things like being called vivacious, is the comparison is “any possible slight”. I believe you are putting everything in the same category. You know what a trivial comment is, you know what an important one is. Put one in a “basket of deplorables” and put the other in a “basket of nothing”, and you’ll know the difference.
Fine, but others disagree, and when the woman who did consider it sexist said so, you said she was “overreacting” to something “trivial,” and thus counterproductive, which revealingly contrasts with your forgiving attitude towards men who make sexist comments (you said you think people are generally good and give them the benefit of the doubt, right?).
“Fine, but others disagree, and when the woman who did consider it sexist said so, you said she was “overreacting” to something “trivial,” and thus counterproductive, which revealingly contrasts with your forgiving attitude towards men who make sexist comments (you said you think people are generally good and give them the benefit of the doubt, right?).”
If I have an opinion that is different that others, you consider it “counterproductive”? I am free to express my difference of opinion whenever I choose. I also don’t remember calling someone out specifically (besides the individual that this thread is about), saying they are overreacting, but using it in a general sense. What person did I say was overreacting about something trivial? I don’t remember that anyone has relayed a trivial story besides the one that the OP did.
And yes, I do generally give people the benefit of the doubt. Not just men who might make sexist comments, but everyone. Is that “counterproductive”?
To add, I am not offended by any possible challenge or argument, I welcome it. However, I do enjoy arguing truthfully.
Well, I might be older than the ramp guy, but I completely understand why he is doing this.
I was raised to hold doors for women, let them enter a building / elevator first, give my seat up on the train to a woman if there are no more seats, help them with baggage, etc. If I didn’t, then when she was alive my mother would have either slapped me silly or given me a look that would have turned me into a pillar of salt. In my world, these are simply social norms among people who weren’t raised in a barn.
This is true even in professional environments, at least where I live. If I see a young male employee move into an elevator ahead of a lady then (even though I admit it’s sexist in a superficial way) it makes me question his upbringing and it makes me think that he’s a jerk. I’ll correct his behavior by clearly setting a different example. I do not think that I’m alone in this or that this is just a generational thing. I’m pretty sure that lots of men and women feel this way.
I would say that if you don’t want the ramp guy to take your bag then you should just tell him. But I understand why his “default setting” is to help with your bag. If people think he’s sexist then they should probably blame his mother, not him
I think women/society are going to have to decide whether they want men to extend them these social courtesies in a professional environment or not. But it’s ridiculous to expect young men to have to guess and for 1/2 the people to get mad no matter what they do.
“You misunderstand–I’m saying that you said women who “overreact” to “trivial things” are counterproductive and don’t do women (in general) any favors.”
No, I don’t misunderstand. YOU said, “Fine, but others disagree, and when the woman who did consider it sexist said so, you said she was “overreacting” to something “trivial,” and thus counterproductive”.
Read your own post #256. You were specific. Would it be clearer for you if I put it in square brackets?
