I almost want to stand up and applaud this quite outstanding level of whataboutery for the poor menz...

[ShotsFired]

Original article link (depressing, not surprising etc): www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2017/aug/30/keith-mann-the-inside-man-who-has-exposed-tech-industry-sexism

Comment:
I believe in equal opportunities , not equal outcomes . That said , I smile at the amount of time examining sexism in tech / science / engineering when there is a dearth of consideration given to the catastrophic loss of male teachers , desperately needed to reach out to disillusioned boys . Male teachers are an endangered species in primary schools and it's getting that way in secondary also . This is spreading to other 'caring' professions too as I noticed when visiting prospective universities with my daughter . 90% plus of psychology graduates are now women ..... at s time when men's mental health is in crisis . But hey , who cares?

I expect he's is too busy to write more bunkum because he spends his life campaigning and working to improve the ratios of men in teaching and other caring professions, given how strongly he feels about it. Right? Rght...? Hello?

I thought we weren't doing anything, just whinging on the internet?

That's what isn't working.

Today 14:44 Gentlemanjohn

Gender stereotyping is getting worse not better. Have you seen this programme?

"Well if that is the case then none of this is working."

It is working. Hence the programme. Is a very definite backlash starting against the rigourously enforced gender stereotypes of the last couple of decades.

Obviously it's something that gets talks about a lot on the feminist board here, but even on the rest of mumsnet, it comes up, time after time.

Parents aiming for a gender neutral upbringing for their children are despairing when that goes down the drain once they start school.

Which is why this programme, specifically looking at a school, is so timely.

It makes a direct link between gender roles and girls' low self-esteem, and boys' anger and the fact that men make up the bulk of prison inmates, for instance.

Just recently, at least three different advertisers have been forced to pull highly sexist adverts. Because of the backlash.

People are waking up to the damage done by gender stereotypes.

They may not have the historical feminist narrative to underpin it, but they are noticing it nonetheless.

If we were going to shift the traditional family paradigm, it would take a radical restructuring of the economy and labour market. Something like the enforcement of a three day week or the introduction of a universal basic income combined with universal, highly funded childcare. A programme of neo-communism essentially. Then women would be at liberty - financially at least - to break away from predefined family roles.

You can encourage profit driven companies to be nice, men to be stay at home dads and girls to play with action men, but none of this will radically alter the structure of society. Just saying.

You display startling ignorance and silliness when you admit that you don't know what something is but nonetheless dismiss it out of hand.

Quite simply unconscious bias training aims to help people to understand how they tend to do things or respond to things with bias, even though they are completely unaware of it. For example, a written case study might have two versions - one about a woman, and one about a man. The responses to the case study will be different according to the apparent gender of the subject. This is unconscious bias.

As for paternity leave - your personal issues with your wife are irrelevant. The point on the importance of providing enhanced paternity rights for fathers by large corporates is that it starts to change the culture. Clearly you are deeply misogynist so I have to assume that your wife is okay with this, but for many men who WOULD like the option, they don't currently feel they can take the government-recommended enhanced paternity leave because it would be too expensive and/or detrimental to their careers. Large organisations (to start) have a role to play in changing that mindset.

I think the programme is unsound. Those children were in front of cameras saying what they intuited they were expected to say.

Today 15:08 Gentlemanjohn

I think the programme is unsound. Those children were in front of cameras saying what they intuited they were expected to say.

Really? Children are affected by outside influence? Say what they think they are supposed to say? Conform?

Nailed it John.

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Of course paternity leave should be provided by all companies. And by all means make it clear to people that this option is available to them. You cannot really actively encourage them to take it though.

I know what unconscious bias is, but you seem to think that knowing about one's bias will change one's attitude.

Why?

"Today 15:07 Gentlemanjohn"

"If we were going to shift the traditional family paradigm, it would take a radical restructuring of the economy and labour market. Something like the enforcement of a three day week or the introduction of a universal basic income combined with universal, highly funded childcare. A programme of neo-communism essentially. Then women would be at liberty - financially at least - to break away from predefined family roles."

"You can encourage profit driven companies to be nice, men to be stay at home dads and girls to play with action men, but none of this will radically alter the structure of society. Just saying."

Brilliant! Feminists might as well just pack up and go home.

Who needed the vote anyway?

Datun, of course people say what they think they're supposed to say according to social conditions; but that is not a process that can be harnessed towards some specific goal in a Pavlovian way. People are not predictable machines.

Because, again, studies show that when people start to recognise their unconscious bias, if they genuinely don't intend to be biased, they will make an effort to change their behaviour or adapt. For example, in performance reviews when the way women's performance reviews have been handled has been seen to be unnecessarily harsh vs men's, organisations and individuals have begun to change their process and thinking to adapt accordingly. If you are a person who believes you treat everyone fairly, when you discover you may have unconscious bias, it is likely to drive you to attempt to make changes which then has positive knock on effects. Eg at a simplistic level, if nursery staff realise that they are re-inforcing gender stereotypes, they may be more likely to think more carefully about the language they use or the way they split children into groups etc, reducing the impact of gender stereotypes on those children in that nursery.

These changes can happen at an individual, group or organisational level.

Unconscious bias training will have little or no impact on people who are openly and happily misogynist (or for that matter, racist, homophobic etc).

As for paternity leave, enhanced paternity leave pay, as provided to many women in large corporates, would do a great deal to encourage men to take it. I certainly don't see why a corporate should insist men take it, but enhanced pay and a guarantee that their job will be available will begin the process of more men engaging at home more.

In the old saying, "you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink" in this case, the corporate needs to build the water trough first.

Of course it can be harnessed!

Girls and boys are treated completely differently from before they are born.

Girls are taught to be subservient and boys are taught to be dominant.

It's in every toy, book, lesson, article of clothing, TV programme, film, conversation.

And yes, it can be changed. There are literally hundreds of women on this site who are doing that right now, with their children.

No Datun you don't have to pack up and go home.

You can campaign for universal childcare; for a UBI; for a three day week; for better pay, conditions and union rights for women in low wage job sectors; for further regulation/criminalisation of the sex industry. There might be an argument to be had about these goals, but they are all specific, concrete goals that can theoretically be achieved.

Changing peoples attitudes with unconscious bias training will not change anything much however.

It's only misogynists who think it can't be changed. Because they think it's innate, or they realise it's not innate but it suits them to say so.

If whinging on the internet is useless, John, then by all means please don't let us keep you from more meaningful pastimes.

Changing peoples attitudes with unconscious bias training will not change anything much however.

Why won't it ?

And yes, it can be changed. There are literally hundreds of women on this site who are doing that right now, with their children.

I think that's great. Of course you should raise girls to believe they're equal and can do whatever job they like - but it stops there. That in itself will not bring about the kind of paradigmatic change feminists demand.

Changing peoples attitudes with unconscious bias training will not change anything much however.

As I mentioned, the teacher in that program has contributed to a thread here. He was utterly shocked to discover that he favoured the boys, when asking questions, over the girls.

He corrected himself, with the use of a neutral mechanism. And he was delighted to do so.

You can change things.

Let me give an example. Pornography.

Pornography has a malign influence on boys perception of women, yes?

So what do you do?

Do you ask the pornographers - people raking in millions of dollars in profit - to offer more positive representations of female sexuality and hope they'll think better of their ways?

Do you encourage boys (and girls) not to look at this limitless plethora of sexual stimuli at their fingertips, hoping they'll come round after being told how exploited and mistreated these women are?

No, you lobby the government to ban it or to impose a regulatory system limiting access and decreasing the power of the porn industry.

Or you don't. And you live with it.

john

I don't think any feminists think this is going to happen overnight. It's like swimming upstream.

But attitudes quite evidently and verifiably can and do change.

Marital rape, for instance. Legal 20 odd years ago. Most people now find that abhorrent.

The scandal over the BBC pay gap. That would have been considered entirely normal 25 years ago.

Challenging laws and campaigning for things like paternity leave don't just end there, they do change attitudes. Roles become more socially acceptable. Which in turn alters perception.

I've personally seen it, on this site alone. An evolution over several years.

Marital rape, for instance. Legal 20 odd years ago. Most people now find that abhorrent.

Yes, because the law was changed. It rightly became illegal. It didn't happen because would be rapists underwent unconscious bias training.

No, you lobby the government to ban it or to impose a regulatory system limiting access and decreasing the power of the porn industry.

Agree.

Yes, because the law was changed. It rightly became illegal. It didn't happen because would be rapists underwent unconscious bias training.

Wife who put up with it for decades certainly have. And communicated that to husbands. There isn't anyone now who thinks sex on demand within marriage is normal.

Those men thought it was their right, backed up by legislation. Genuinely. Now they don't.

I've personally seen it, on this site alone. An evolution over several years.

Datun, I agree of much of what you say but I don't think things are getting better at all. Or at least things are getting better for some fairly privileged demographic of professional, educated women. Beyond that, we have Trump and the alt right; a sex industry bigger and more ubiquitous than anything in prior history; record levels of mental health problems among girls and young women; global sex trafficking; online abuse etc etc.

In some ways, things are going backwards.

Well I suppose John is partly right so long as people like him think it is an impossibility and actively work against it. It will certainly be a lot slower.

Why not be part of the solution rather than part of the problem?