Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism and confirmation bias

128 replies

jennyvstheworld · 14/08/2011 18:03

It is an incontravertible truth that equality of opportunity is still often lacking in the UK and continues to require our attention. It is also true that power in society is achieved by adopting attributes more often found amongst men. Let us say, therefore, that the general tenets of feminism are correct.

Some people, however, seem to believe that because they are feminists (and because there is veracity in the notion of feminism), they themselves are incapable of making either an incorrect or even tenuous statement.

Mass generalisations are habitual, statistics - cherry-picked blindly from research without consideration of context or criteria - are thrown about to support dubious claims and the most minute and inconsequential event can be twisted to demonstrate conspiracy and oppression.

I offer the following as a statement made on this thread that no one saw fit to challenge:

"but where are the "good" male role models going to come from? men show no interest in teaching, little interest in community work, they are en masse opting out."

There are no good male role models? Men show no interest in teaching?? Men are not interested in community work? They are en masse opting out? (opting out of what - society? Community?) All four of these statements are erroneous and offensive and yet not one person - from all those who claim to believe in fairness and an end to the judgement of a person based on their gender - took issue with this.

This is just one of many examples. I have also seen opprobrium levelled at single-mothers and SAHMs. I have seen praise offered to successful women concurrent with condemnation of their male peers despite both forming part of the 'patriarchy'. There have also been a hundred other ill-conceived ideas that are accepted or condoned through silence because they fall under the feminist banner.

So my question is this: we are all guilty of confirmation bias to some extent; how guilty is feminism?

I will be interested to see how many replies demonstrate the hypothesis.

OP posts:
jennyvstheworld · 15/08/2011 20:55

Equally, I have never said that there wasn't a minority of men in teaching. You seem to think that I have, however, whilst missing the fact that the statement that was originally made (see OP) was the crux of my posts. This is why we are having two conversations.

Too exasperating. G'night.

OP posts:
VictorGollancz · 15/08/2011 21:00

Oh, silly me! To extrapolate that men are not a significant presence the teaching profession from a statement such as 'men show no interest in teaching, little interest in community work, they are en masse opting out'.

How awful that you have to exasperate yourself dealing with such limited minds as my own.

mathanxiety · 15/08/2011 21:12

'Politicians are elected because they are supposed to possess and exercise good judgement.'

They are?

I thought being tall or good looking or fitting your constituency profile of an acceptable candidate or being in enough with the backroom boys of your party counted for something? And in a first past the post system a lot depends on how positively your party is perceived too, or even how negatively your main opposing candidate's party is perceived...

You have a tendency to base your arguments on spurious foundations, Jenny.

I don't see the point of basing a thread on what was clearly a set of statements that were quite extreme and not reasonable. If you wanted to ascertain whether feminists are more likely to be guilty of confirmation bias you should have chosen a different topic (not whether men are interested in working as educators) on which to hang your argument.

'Can you not differentiate between 'some' people making false statements and 'all' people failling to take issue with those same false statements? This doesn't seem so complicated!'

Maybe I am having an especially dumb day today, but I find this very impenetrable.

sparky688 · 15/08/2011 21:19

jenny-what is youre problem?
are you on the autistic spectrum?[or another condition]
if you are-please do tell.
youve been going on about stastistics ect for ages now-
i myself has mentioned that i dont believe in stastistics ect-but youve ignored what ive said[not that you have to answer]-so i can only come to the conclusion that-a-you have a condition and you are obsessed with these things.or b-you are purposly winding people up.
really-does it matter whether people put up links ect for stastistics?no it doesnt.

NellieForbush · 15/08/2011 21:35

New to this board, but interested. Just read the wiki link.

"I have seen praise offered to successful women"

Define 'successful'.

Is this an example of confirmation bias?

joaninha · 15/08/2011 22:37

Oops have just opened this thread to find the OP is lecturing us on confirmation bias! LOL.. seriously Jenny? The words "pot" and "kettle" come to mind..

MrsReasonable · 15/08/2011 23:13

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

VictorGollancz · 15/08/2011 23:24

Whereas your post demonstrates a vast intelligence...

StewieGriffinsMom · 15/08/2011 23:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

sparky688 · 15/08/2011 23:37

uncalled for mrsreasonable.

MrsReasonable · 15/08/2011 23:44

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

StewieGriffinsMom · 15/08/2011 23:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

StewieGriffinsMom · 15/08/2011 23:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsReasonable · 15/08/2011 23:57

I wasn't aware of that, but it's not an excuse. Everything has auto-correct/spelling suggestion nowadays. This is a textual medium, and legibility is important.

Besides, that wasn't the crux of the 'stupidity' jibe (I realised after I hit post that 'ignorance' would've been better, but there's no edit button) - it was the mind-boggling statement that she doesn't 'believe' in stastistics. Well, I don't 'believe' that 2+2=4, but it's still true regardless.

MrsReasonable · 16/08/2011 00:01

Also, I can't see where you called out sparky when she said OP was either a trolley or mentally ill. I guess that kind of uncalled-for personal attack is fine, but insulting their typing?

MrsReasonable · 16/08/2011 00:02

Trolley = troll. Bloody phone.

sparky688 · 16/08/2011 00:02

apart from being semi-illiterate-im blind you dick.
i find the computor difficult also.
so really-im doing quite well-i usually get my point across and others dont usually slate me for this.

StewieGriffinsMom · 16/08/2011 00:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

sparky688 · 16/08/2011 00:06

nope-i asked her if she was on the autistic spectrum or had another condition.
iasked her this for a reason.
it is not a personal attack by asking this question.

StewieGriffinsMom · 16/08/2011 00:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

sunshineandbooks · 16/08/2011 00:08

I love the english language and I can be a bit of a (private) pedant but I've never had a problem understanding sparky's posts and I enjoy reading them. She has a unique insight that is very valid in this section. She quite often hits the nail on the head with great clarity and a lot more succinctly than posters like me.

I think publicly criticising someone's literacy is akin to making fun of someone's accent. It's not something that is easily changed and says more about the critic than it does the subject.

MrsReasonable · 16/08/2011 00:11

The piece I quoted has significantly poorer grammar than the rest of that post, so whatever difficulties you have are no excuse otherwise it would have been the same across the whole thing.

Besides, I'm taking issue with what you said, not how you said it.

StewieGriffinsMom · 16/08/2011 00:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

meditrina · 16/08/2011 00:17

Fascinating thread - someone who takes a different line is accused of being on the autistic spectrum.

This forum is easily the most hostile place on MN. The good nature - which is often found even in AIBU, and certainly in other serious topics - simply doesn't exist here.

I have wondered about the dynamics of this group and why it is so often so hostile. I assume the aim is only to reinforce views of the like-minded, because it is certainly unlikely to be persuasive to occasional visitors. Which I shall continue to be - despite the (predictable) reaction this will get. But I post it anyhow - in the faint hope that, even though the conclusion will be to decry why I even bother to post here when I'm so nasty about it, the more open minded of the spectrum of posters might just pause to think about the impression they are giving.

Today's AIBU thread is an interesting counterpoint.

LeninGrad · 16/08/2011 00:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.