[American Oyaji]

That wont happen in Japan. Not until women start cutting men off from the booty. But then again, that wont happen either because in Japan, going out and gettin some strange on the side is a common occurance.

The only way to get this to happen is for sexless marriages to end.

And that is the domain of women. Women control whether or not sex will happen. Not men. If women at home were more accomodating (ive heard complaints from MANY MANY men about this) , whores would be out of business. Once the whores are gone, then women clamp down and demand better treatment.

But it wont happen.

Not until China takes over.

[GomiGirl]

AO, can't really agree with you there.. the issue goes a lot deeper.

The main issue is the pressure that workers are under to spend so much time in their offices whether they are being productive or not. So as a result the people that are more likely to do this are men as women will more likely take part time jobs or jobs where they can clock off at 5pm in order to go home and take care of the rug-rats. But this is not limited to Japan but is seen in most other countries.

It is a vicious cycle due to a lack of communication, govt and company policies. Perception vs reality of the workplace.

Rather than a focus on the issue gender equality alone, I would prefer to see hire/fire policies on talent, remuneration with performance benchmarks etc etc. This would lead to better productivity for companies and the "gender" issue would simply disappear as talent and performance are not a function of gender or how many hours somebody is sitting at their desks surfing the internet.

*sigh* ahh the fantasy of utopia.

AO, people need to feel in control of their lives and many women who don't have power in the workplace use their homes to exercise this. It is a very sad state of affairs. If you have no "real" power you will use whatever you can to get it, albeit in small ways. So it is not simply a matter of women not being "accomodating" to the needs of their men, rather it is a way for them to feel good about themselves as perhaps this is the only asset they have at their disposal. Many husbands expect their wives to fulfil certain roles that perhaps they are not comfortable in playing. I don't agree with this at all, just stating the facts.

If I was to spend all day at home and not interacting with the world or contributing via work, I would go crazy..

I don't think that women should all be CEO's or politicians or whatever, the important thing is if that is where their talents lie, the choice should be available to them. The same goes for the pressure that men are under to fit into a particular role. I know many men who are limited in their choices of say wanting to be more family orientated, but are limited to the corporate treadmill for financial and social reasons.

It is a societal issue where there are no winners or losers. Women who feel good about their lot in life are very sexual. But then many women don't know how to break the cycle for themselves or are limited in their choices for a variety of reasons.

Unfortunately if you are born male or female, there are certain expectations, but if you don't fit into this package and are not able to break out and find your own groove then you are doomed for a very miserable existence.

The protruding nail.....

[GuyJean]

I would prefer to see hire/fire policies on talent, remuneration with performance benchmarks etc etc. This would lead to better productivity for companies and the "gender" issue would simply disappear as talent and performance are not a function of gender or how many hours somebody is sitting at their desks surfing the internet.

Amen to that!

Except I heard that females in US schools are outperforming males in EVERY subject!

The protruding nail.....

Whachyu talkin' bout, Gomi?

GJ

[GomiGirl]

Except I heard that females in US schools are outperforming males in EVERY subject!

My opinion which is just my opinion, is that girls are being encouraged now from birth that they need to work and study hard and to be independant becuase they have to compete in the work market but there are more options and rewards for this effort. In the past the options were not there so many girls weren't trying that hard as they knew their choices were limited.

I really think that people need to be raising and educating boys in the same way.. but this has been neglected and there are a heap of bewildered guys out there who were snoozing while others were working and becoming independant. This translates to a heap of breakdown in relationships as gender roles are changing faster than the snoozers realise. Then when they look for a "traditional" girl to settle down with there are none left. Makes for a heap of successful but single gals who have no time for the snoozers.

[cstaylor]

Except I heard that females in US schools are outperforming males in EVERY subject!

That's true until University AFAIK.

[GuyJean]

Except I heard that females in US schools are outperforming males in EVERY subject!

That's true until University AFAIK.

I believe it includes colleges.. Not sure though. I think the female to male ratio in University is 60/40 too!

GJ

[cstaylor]

I will speak from my own experience at a California University: in my major, of the few women that finished the four year degree, you could count on a single hand the number who had cum laude or better on their degrees. In some of the other departments, I did see great numbers of women, so this data is probably averaged across all departments.

[American Oyaji]

GG, that is indeed a good analysis of the situation.

Hmmm, I will think on these things.


I think I need to go back to college.

[Neo-Rio]

Except I heard that females in US schools are outperforming males in EVERY subject!

I really think that people need to be raising and educating boys in the same way.. but this has been neglected and there are a heap of bewildered guys out there who were snoozing while others were working and becoming independant. This translates to a heap of breakdown in relationships as gender roles are changing faster than the snoozers realise. Then when they look for a "traditional" girl to settle down with there are none left. Makes for a heap of successful but single gals who have no time for the snoozers.

On the topic, I think it's fair to say that the neurology of males and females, especially at young ages, is vastly different. Young girls can better concentrate on their studies in a closed, quiet, classroom environment. Putting hyperactive boys (and I think ADD is a lot of crap) in a classroom doesn't work because men have always been physically active and have instincts that dictate that physical activity is educational... which in turn is one of more complicated reasons why boys are more likely to misbehave and not concentrate on stuides as well as women.

[GomiGirl]

On the topic, I think it's fair to say that the neurology of males and females, especially at young ages, is vastly different.

You are very correct. There is so much work being done by psychologists all over the world about how the brain works for different activities/stimulus as well as gender bias. I have always thought that "traditional" schools don't suit everybody and there should be alternatives to suit the needs of individuals.

People process information differently - it is more than just being left or right brained, some people are visual, auditory etc. and the list goes on ad nauseum.

[hanabi]

think it's fair to say that the neurology of males and females, especially at young ages, is vastly different.

How is that fair to say? I think it has more to do with gender-based expectations set on people from birth. Children will try to get away with as much they can. It only so happens that we let boys get away with more.

From the article:

The number of Japanese women who oppose the conventional notion that the husband should work and the wife should stay home marked a sharp 33.6 percentage point increase to 57.3% -- but this was still much lower than the ratios in other countries, including 93.2% in Sweden...

I think this way of thinking is partially to blame for the high suicide rate among working men in Japan. With all the pressures of supporting a family with a job you hate and a wife who has little to no intention of carrying the financial burden, it's no wonder they feel trapped.

[hanabi]

There is so much work being done by psychologists all over the world about how the brain works for different activities/stimulus as well as gender bias.

The reason I don't buy this is that it's worked for them for so long, that I can't see why everyone is whining about it now. Could it simply be that women are catching up, so of course there must be something wrong with the system?

[ramchop]

think it's fair to say that the neurology of males and females, especially at young ages, is vastly different.

How is that fair to say? I think it has more to do with gender-based expectations set on people from birth. Children will try to get away with as much they can. It only so happens that we let boys get away with more.

I think it's fair to say (though I'd remove the "especially at young ages").

Girls are different from boys.

It is nonsense (or ignorance) to suggest otherwise.

[GomiGirl]

Girls are different from boys.

It is nonsense (or ignorance) to suggest otherwise.

Absolutely no argument. But my point is that choices should be available to all irrespective of age, gender, race etc etc.

It works both ways as it doesn't box people (all people) into traditional roles that perhaps they are not comfortable with and not where their talents lie.

[cstaylor]

Yeah, there's a big gap between recognizing differences and having the State enforce those differences.

[ramchop]

Yeah, there's a big gap between recognizing differences and having the State enforce those differences.

Sorry, I've lost track of the thread.

Are you agreeing that Japan has catching up to do with the rest of the world and should "step up laws and institutions to enable working women to engage in work both at the office and at home, including child rearing."?

or are you saying the rest of the PC world is going mad?

[Neo-Rio]

Girls are different from boys.

It is nonsense (or ignorance) to suggest otherwise.

Absolutely no argument. But my point is that choices should be available to all irrespective of age, gender, race etc etc.

It works both ways as it doesn't box people (all people) into traditional roles that perhaps they are not comfortable with and not where their talents lie.

Girls are different from boys.

It is nonsense (or ignorance) to suggest otherwise.

Absolutely no argument. But my point is that choices should be available to all irrespective of age, gender, race etc etc.

It works both ways as it doesn't box people (all people) into traditional roles that perhaps they are not comfortable with and not where their talents lie.

Agreed here too... but sometimes it's not just big nasty evil society that does it to people.... after all what society views as correct comes from human insticts that have been trained for thousands upon thousands of years. That is essentially what we are ALL fighting against, men and women, irrespective of gender. It makes no sense that men and women differ and one gets better grades than the other etc.etc., EXCEPT when evolutionary biology comes along to have its say, and THEN it makes PERFECT sense that there are two genders with built-in instincts and vast differences. Human beings can't quickly adapt to a vastly changing world if all our genes were identical and we were all hermaphrodites... SO nature screws around a bit and makes a mass of people with completely DIFFERENT sets of abilities and skills (particularly in men moreso than women), so that the ones with the decent skills gain recognition in society and breed, and the ones who don't have the skills.... die off.

I admit, that's the ugly way to look at it, and that's pretty much what society pushes men & women into (although the whole process is all dressed up to hide this ugly reality). So as far as I'm concerned, with things the way they are... there will ALWAYS be somebody worse off, and ALWAYS somebody who can't get their way, ESPECIALLY when it comes to so-called gender "inequalities".

I agree though, people should be given the opportunities to show their stuff and let it stand on it's merit, but society being the way I just explained it, there's always going to be someone trying to tip the scales in their favour at the expense of everyone else.

According to studies in human ethology, it is only natural that women like Gomigirl have MAJOR issues with this (And I don't blame her). Evolutionary biology dictates that women should have the right to look after themselves at the expense of men for the survival of the species.
(Put 10 men and one woman in a room - only one man is needed for fertilization, so men are expendable. Put 10 women and one man in a room and everyone is happy )

EVERYBODY has got a bone to pick with those men who want to tip society around, and all the other men, so that they end up being that guy in the room with ten women.

[cstaylor]

Yeah, there's a big gap between recognizing differences and having the State enforce those differences.

Sorry, I've lost track of the thread.

Are you agreeing that Japan has catching up to do with the rest of the world and should "step up laws and institutions to enable working women to engage in work both at the office and at home, including child rearing."?

or are you saying the rest of the PC world is going mad?

I was summarizing GG's point: that there are differences between the sexes, but the state shouldn't use biology as a crutch to enforce preconceived notions on gender roles.

[Neo-Rio]

I was summarizing GG's point: that there are differences between the sexes, but the state shouldn't use biology as a crutch to enforce preconceived notions on gender roles.

I think biology actually bolsters GG's point.

[hanabi]

but the state shouldn't use biology as a crutch to enforce preconceived notions on gender roles.

I can agree with this.

And suck my dick, ramchop, for that "or ignorance" comment. There are differences physically, but it's not like we all lack the ability to adjust. If the state emphasizes gender difference in education, that's an open invitation to treat genders differently in "the real world." Meaning: there'll be an even larger gap between the way men and women are educated, hence even more of an excuse to hire/promote one over the other.

[GomiGirl]

I will stand by my main point of:

"Rather than a focus on the issue gender equality alone, I would prefer to see hire/fire policies on talent, remuneration with performance benchmarks etc etc. This would lead to better productivity for companies and the "gender" issue would simply disappear as talent and performance are not a function of gender or how many hours somebody is sitting at their desks surfing the internet. "

Keep it at the workplace level where there can be regulatory efforts and performance reviews etc. Taking it to the gender level really stirs up a heap of emotion and personal issues that are separate from the work-place.

I want the option of getting a job based on my skills, talents and contribution to the job. or at least a fair shot at getting the job. I don't want to be hired or overlooked because of other factors like my age, gender or whatever. But this is not going to happen until new economy practices become standard. I don't want to get into a whole discussion about quotas or affirmative action because I don't know that much about it.

OK I am rambling as there as so many sub-issues. Bottom line is that people are more than their gender or race, or religion, or age, or looks, yadi yadi yadi. Don't put me in a box 'cos I will fight my way out of it.

[cstaylor]

And suck my dick, ramchop ...

I see someone has been taking debate lessons from Gai...

[GomiGirl]

SO nature screws around a bit and makes a mass of people with completely DIFFERENT sets of abilities and skills (particularly in men moreso than women), so that the ones with the decent skills gain recognition in society and breed, and the ones who don't have the skills.... die off.

Not quite sure at what you mean here - examples? I think there are as many differences as there are people. Just the limitations of the human brain cannot deal with infinite differences and so must make groupings of similar characteristics. eg men, women, old people, young people, different races etc. BTW why do you think there are more differences in men than women?

According to studies in human ethology, it is only natural that women like Gomigirl have MAJOR issues with this (And I don't blame her).

Actually I don't get all uptight as personally I have been OK because my personality and upringing doesn't let me to sit at the back of the bus and say "shou ga nai". But I think that there are many others who have a heap of potential who are not able to make a meaningful contribution because they belong to a group and a whole heap of limitations/preconceptions are projected onto them.

(Put 10 men and one woman in a room - only one man is needed for fertilization, so men are expendable. Put 10 women and one man in a room and everyone is happy )

I wouldn't be happy.... this thread is not about the continuation of the species but the rights of the citizens while they are alive. Don't get the two issues confused.

[Neo-Rio]

Not quite sure at what you mean here - examples? I think there are as many differences as there are people. Just the limitations of the human brain cannot deal with infinite differences and so must make groupings of similar characteristics. eg men, women, old people, young people, different races etc. BTW why do you think there are more differences in men than women?

I am using biology as a way of explaining why things are the way they are - to the point where we have gender inequality (going right back to the starting thread of this discussion).

For some reason, nature places men constantly in harm's way. Men often have to deal with getting attacked by other men for looking at them funny. Men cannot get away with waiting for some woman to marry them and look after them. Men are more likely to suicide than women. Meanwhile, women blame men for everything and get away with it. Nature gears society up for shedding excess men. To use a cliche, It's every man for himself. If a woman is upset, men rush to her aid. If a man is upset, nobody gives a stuff.

Don't get me wrong, I am not bitter about any of this. That's just how things are.

Men (in general) engage in riskier (in general) business (in general) than women (in general). And for some reason, men are more likely (generally speaking) to rebel against other men and society more often to increase their rank in order for attention (in general), whereas women have no need to do this, as they are (generally) looked after very well and are (generally) more likely to conform to what everyone thinks is correct. Hence men are (generally) more diverse than women (according to studies).

I can show references, but this discussion is more emotionally charged for that to be of much interest....
..... generally speaking :P

[GomiGirl]

Don't get me wrong, I am not bitter about any of this.

You sound fairly bitter, but you have made my point in that gender inequality hurts men as much as it hurts women. But again you are confusing the workplace and the social. If gender issues were taken out of the workplace and performance was measured on measurable factors (results) rather than perception (how hard you look like you are working or how much time you are spending at work) then the gender inequality would go away.

But the points that you cited are social problems and not nature issues. If everything is so easy for women, why are so many trying to change things?

It is tough for everybody out there. Why not spend some time looking for a solution rather than just stating the obvious problems?

Also it is the generalisations that have caused the problems in the first place and so looking past them for solutions is more valuable than whining about how bad it is to be a guy... no-one wins a pissing contest.

but then maybe you are just trolling???

[American Oyaji]

GG,
Generaly speaking . His points ARE valid. As are yours.

He is stating some of the issues BEHIND the current thought structure. And you are proposing an answer at the economic level that is based on the issues Neo-Rio is talking about.

You both are looking at the same elephant.
Just different parts of it.

[GuyJean]

You people are too friggin' smart. Must be a bunch o' chicks..

GJ

[ramchop]

And suck my dick, ramchop, for that "or ignorance" comment.

No thanks. Funny that the word "ignorant" is seen as more of an insult than "nonsense".

I once shared your views, but then I had a son... and then a daughter. OK, this is not a huge sample size, but there are some very noticeable differences which fit the stereotypes.

[hanabi]

I see someone has been taking debate lessons from Gai...

'twas a joke. Gender ignorance? Dick? I don't have one but claim to. Get it? Never mind. It wasn't funny. I accept that.

ramchop, you're right it is a very small sample size and I'm not convinced that those differences in your children have *absolutely nothing* to do with how people treat them, how they were raised and what they've observed from the people around them rather than *pure nature* alone.

By the way, Neo-Rio, I don't think nature is constantly placing men in harm's way more than women. That's got more to do with social definitions. Haven't you ever heard of societies where women were hunters too? Controlled the way the people were governed? Or where marriages were matrilineal rather than patrilineal? Are you saying that those cultures go against nature?

[kamome]

Is it me, or has it been a long time since we've heard from hanabi? Sounds like it's time for another FG party

Or, hanabi, you can just hang out with Guyjean and me and discuss gender bias and other social ills over beers in Shibuya....