Irritating Sex “Differences” January 2, 2006 Lauren Cathy Young, Echidne of the Snakes, and Amanda Marcotte take on the latest proof of the Mars/Venus divide. *cough* bullshit *cough*
If you don’t believe in a difference between the sexes why bother being a feminist? Why not just call yourself a unisexist?
I am not anti-venus, I am just pro-mars… because it is better to be pro something than anti anything…
I’m voting parody since I prefer to be an optimist. The first sentence of his blog is “The Chinese are after our moon.” Holy shit, I’ve found love. Stupid, stupid love.
Seriously answer me, how can you call yourself a FEMINIST if there is no difference between male and female?
How can you call yourself lesbians either? If there’s no difference, why don’t you like the bone? I’m not trying to be mean, I’m just wondering. Wouldn’t everyone just be omnisexuals? Please don’t fall in love with me, I’ve already had enough problems with women on this site.
Please don’t fall in love with me, I’ve already had enough problems with women on this site. No problem. I’ll go ahead and ban you since I’m tired of you wasting my time. If you are a parody, brush up on the humor. If you’re just that stupid, I’m sorry.
If you are a parody, brush up on the humor. If you’re just that stupid, I’m sorry. LOL! Thanks Lauren, I needed a laugh today.
For your amusement: “Dr” John Gray, author of Men are from Bullshit, Women are from Horsepucky, got his Ph.D. from a diploma mill.
First time poster, but I wanted to share this interesting nugget: On This American Life on NPR, a man who used to work for a publishing company said he rejected the Men Are from Mars book because he thought it was misogynist drivel. A co-worker rescued the mysoginist drivel from the reject bin.
There there is this book, too, don’t forget. (Is anyone else having a hard time getting Amazon to load lately?)
Oh, I forgot. Once, a guy told me (he was a physics major) that women are secretaries and the like because they’re better as those kind of jobs and like dealing with people whereas men are in the hard sciences bc they think better about that stuff. *eyeroll*
Once, a guy told me (he was a physics major) that women are secretaries and the like because they’re better as those kind of jobs and like dealing with people whereas men are in the hard sciences bc they think better about that stuff. Oooh, I wish I could ask that guy to cite his sources. He could hardly refuse, having declared that men are better at science, but, since there is no good emperical data (or even bad emperical data) to back up his BS, he’d be in deep trouble very quickly. Then I could make fun of him for being worse at science than a girl.
I don’t know… I think the problem with both articles (Hirshman’s original and this follow up) is that they prescribe a set of rules for women that they don’t know, have never met and will never meet, all while thinking they know what’s best for said women. I firmly believe that men and women are more complicated than that. When we start saying all women must do one thing or another, whether we approach it from a feminist point of view (all women should work outside the home in high paying powerful jobs and have no more than one child) or a misogynist (all women should stay home, wait on their husbands hand and foot and give up all hope of ever having a meaningful life outside the home) we get into dangerous territory where we ignore actual women and their families. For example, I right now work full time in addition to having a one and half year old daughter. My mother watches my daughter during the times when both my husband and I are working and it works very well for us. However, I am currently expecting another child…. I don’t feel right asking my mother, who already has her hands full with my daughter, to add a newborn to the mix. My husband and I sat down and worked out every possible scenario (we both work full time and put the kids in daycare, I work full time, he stays home with the kids, he works full time, I stay home, we both work part-time) and the only scenario that enables us to afford everything we need to afford, provides ample time for us to spend with the children and with each other is for me to stay home and him to work. If we reversed roles, we would be broke off our asses as he makes about 7000 more than I do a year. In addition, I despise my job and have wanted to quit and stay home with Isabelle for awhile now. So I am going to take this time off to enjoy spending time with my children and take graduate classes part time so that when I am ready to go back to work in a couple years, once our youngest is old enough for daycare, I can get a better paying job. It’s what works best for me, my family and our life. I fail to see it as me becoming a subservient doormat to my husband (who is wonderful, hard working man who sees me as his equal and has no problem doing his share of housework without being bitched at or or needing to be reminded, who shares childcare duties equally and who would stay home in a heartbeat if we could swing it financially and I had the desire to work) or being a traitor to the feminist movement. Nor do I see what I am doing now (working full time and being a mother) as an abandonment of my child or proper wifely duties.
There’s a much bigger difference between a right-wing and a left-wing than it is between a man and a woman (if they are both left-winged or right-winged – of course). So, people have different talents, but I guess special skills for cleaning or cooking is most likely culturally created, not biological – most people can’t do a thing good if they haven’t done it before. Different genitals doesn’t automatically mean totally different brains, like different skincolor just means different skincolor, or like swedish and chinese just mean different culture, not different brains.
Julie, I assume that your scenario included opportunity costs (long-term loss of your salary, benefits, and raises), the additional costs of insurance that might otherwise be covered by your jobs, and the economic difference if he loses his job with you at home vs. him losing his job with you also working outside the home?
Of course! I only make 11.11 an hour, so it would all pretty much be eaten up by day care costs and the long term loss of salary is going to happen either way. Honestly, I don’t like my job enough to do it for free, I’d rather be home with the kids. My company rarely (once every one or two years) gives raises (I’ve never gotten one the 2 and 1/2 years I’ve been there) and when they do it’s literally pennies, I think the last one was a 15 cent across the board raise. I don’t have any benefits but vacation time/sick leave through my job, the ones at his are much better and we have used them for close to two years. And actually, with the drop in income, we could switch our children to Child Health Plus if we wanted to, which would save us more money, we don’t qualify for it now though. With the field I work in (human services) were he to lose his job, I could get one in a matter of weeks doing direct care (they are ALWAYS hiring for direct care), which only pays 1.11 less an hour than I make now. We have enough in savings to cover those couple of weeks, so all is good there. His job is actually fairly stable, so I am not terribly concerned, but back up plans are always good. Honestly, with a BA in psychology I am never going to have a wonderful high paying job, so I think taking the two years off to spend with the kids and get my masters degree will pay off in the long run. I am looking at a degree in elementary education, and the starting pay for teachers in my district is roughly 10,000 more a year than I make now. (Imagine 11.11 an hour multiplied by 37.5 hours and having NY state taxes taken out. It’s not much) The only thing that will hurt at all is my social security benefits, but I can’t picture a gap of two years affecting it enough to make it the most important factor, especially if we maintain a retirement account for me, which we plan to.
Well, according to ol’ Limpys blog, this is now the Feminazi Blog. Wanna rethink the humor v. stupid question?
Julie, my point was not to criticize your choice–duh, it’s your family–but what I’m really hearing is that you hate your job and are happy to give it up to be home. That’s fine. But the numbers are kind of window dressing. It’s not true, for example, that you are NEVER going to have a high-paying job with a B.A.; it’s also not true that the only choices are current employer vs. no employer. I’d also caution against the assumption that you only need savings for a couple of weeks, or that you will spend only two years out of the workforce. Remember that when you go back in, you’ll likely be making close to what you are now–and your husband’s likely increase in income is going to be offset by the money you spend on improving your marketability. You’re also assuming that whatever education you can squeeze in around a toddler and a new baby, in the next couple of years, will so substantially improve that you will be able to leap the gap of two years out of the workforce plus the costs of daycare. Please understand that I’m NOT trying to talk you out of staying home with your kids. What I am saying is that when what you really want is to be home with your children, it’s easy to kind of hand-wave the future–assuming that you’ll just sort of go on cruise control for a while and hop right back in.
OT, Warning shoelimpy, annieangel, and similar names are not to be taken seriously. I suspect there are some erotic games being played, as they both have websites and they both list blogs from which they have been banned,, and their are some weird interactions in their own blog comments sections. . I don’t have any ulterior motives, just tired of these two getting away with interrupting and sidetracking conversation for their own motives – and it’s happened on many sites – Crooks & Liars, Atrios, Beliefnet, Pandagon, Living with style, even the Anarchist sites etc.. I’m just a lurker, but I’ve watched these two sidetrack discussions on several sites. Investigation indicates that these folks are married to each other, and this is just a sick game for them. Please don’t pay any atttention to these folks, They are exhibitionists and thrive on being able to say that they were banned from a site. Goodness ,help the people who live close to them. By the way, I like your blog, and will come back. Have it bookmarked now, so that’s one good thing that….never mind.
Thanks mythago… I know it wasn’t meant to be criticism. You’re right when you say it basically boils down to I hate my job and I would personally love to be home for awhile. It’s funny, I actually used to love what I do (not this particular position, mind you, but working in human services) and I still do feel like I’m making a difference (I work for a non-profit agency that helps people with developmental disabilities) but I think I am suffering the human service burnout that they always talk about. Usually it occurs after three years, I was lucky and made it to 5. Ahh well… that’s all sort of beside the point. (And you’re actually right, I was figuring I would make up the gap in a couple years, I completely forgot to add in daycare costs when I do go back.) I think it’s also easy to romanticize staying home, you never know after 6 months of it I may be climbing the walls and screaming to go back to work. I guess the point I was trying to make in the larger sense, which I probably should have done wihout dragging in my own example, is that most women want the freedom to do what they deem best for themselves and their families without a bunch of bullshit rules handed down by people they’ve never met. I know women who need and want adult interaction and a meaningful job outside the home, who would never want to stay home and I think that’s great. I have two sisters who think staying home is the stupidest thing they’ve ever heard and will most likely never do it. I also know women who all they’ve ever wanted to do is be stay at home moms (I have a friend who worked in a high paying field and was extremely successful, but left to be a stay at home mother and hasn’t looked back. She’s extremely happy and wouldn’t change a thing) and I think that’s equally great. While it’s always important to examine one’s choices in the context of the larger social issues, I have a problem with crticizing women for making the choices they felt were best. I always thought that was what feminism was about… freeing women and men (I actually have a BIL who is a stay at home dad) to make the choices they felt were best for them without worrying about whether or not someone who had never met them approved. I guess I like choice feminism and feel no need to go to a radical form that tries to tell women they must do that which they have no desire in doing simply because someone who has never met them thinks it’s what is best for them.
Feminism is about making choices; it’s not about assuming all choices are made equally and in a vacuum, and it’s not about ignoring the fact that certain choices are only expected of women.’ And you’re actually right, I was figuring I would make up the gap in a couple years, I completely forgot to add in daycare costs when I do go back. This is why I was picking at you. Having made the choice to stay home for whatever reasons, it’s now important for you and your husband to realistically assess the impact it will and could have on your family. “Oh, I’ll go to school part-time” is not a plan. “We’ll set up an IRA for me” is not the same as setting up an IRA. “If he gets laid off I’ll get a job in two weeks” is not a good way to be prepared for sudden unemployment, and “I trust him” is not covering your bases if, God forbid, you should find yourself abandoned or widowed. Of course it’s not your job to explain your family’s financial planning to me, or anyone else here. But I don’t think it’s responsible planning to point to some not-well-thought-out numbers as the ‘reason’ for staying home with your kids, and then relying on those numbers. You also seem to have fallen into the trap of assuming that women need to justify their choices to the world at large. 😉 (BTW, I don’t mean that your husband is a jerk who will dump you for a bimbo, but things happen–I know of one person whose thirty-year-old husband had a completely unexpected stroke and suffered a radical personality change.)
You also seem to have fallen into the trap of assuming that women need to justify their choices to the world at large. 😉 I was thinking that too. If you want to stay at home and be with your kids then do it! Hey, I hope that I have that option when I have kids. I guess I like choice feminism and feel no need to go to a radical form that tries to tell women they must do that which they have no desire in doing simply because someone who has never met them thinks it’s what is best for them. Also I think that what you call choice feminism is the most radical form of feminism out there. Well its at least how I have viewed my own form of feminism which I also thought to be radical. This is obvious, but the most ridiculous thing about both of these articles is that it labels them as arguments for women to do one or the other; work or home. They both ignore this choice factor. Brooks argues that staying at home is powerful, if so than why aren’t more men encouraged to do it? “I blame the Patriarchy”
Busted 🙂 It comes from two years of defending my choice to work and be a mom against my parents. (You really need to be home, it’s not fair to Isabelle, you should quit your job and make Chris get two jobs, etc…) So here we go, I’m staying home when this baby is born cause I want to. (I should practice saying this without the 8 million excuses and reasons behind it, right?)
My theory is that David Brooks’ understanding of women is straight from Playboy and Family Circle. I dared to break open a copy of On Paradise Drive to find out what in heck his problem is.