I'm sure there are others, but these are the three that come to me off the top of my head.
Childcare is one of those things that I've read too many news articles about children being cared for by creeps. I don't care if it's right or wrong, but men just need to pick a different profession other than childcare because I will never be comfortable with it. Is it fair? Probably not, but since you can't tell which pool has been proverbially pissed in, it's best not swim in any of them.
As someone who works with kids, this makes me sad.
I've worked with a few guys and they're not creepy at all, but they get bad looks just because they are men.
They are every bit as capable and while there have been some horror stories there are many more men who work with children simply because they enjoy doing so. Not to mention nurseries are always on the lookout for abuse and have pages and pages of protocol about what to do if a child even hints at it.
And as much as i oppose discriminating against transexuals, they should simply go to the room they currently have the parts for. Just like everyone else.
Except, the problem is when we get a trans person who looks exactly like their identified gender, they just don't have the right genitals. What's safer for them, to go into the changing room for the other gender, or the one for the gender they identify with?
Plus, whenever you enforce a rule like that, it ends up only affecting those trans people who can't pass, since those who can pass will never be questioned.
Which double standards do you think are necessary? I was just thinking about how female-on-male sexual harassment is often used as a topic of humour for sitcoms, but if it wasn't funny to so many, it wouldn't be used, would it? Admittedly, that kind of sexual harassment is pretty rare. So I'm not sure whether or not it's bad for them to use it, even if it is a double standard.
Hmm, tricky subject. If a black guy and myself (white guy) applied to the same position and every single test/relevent piece of data shows that the two of us are equally capable of fulfilling the role, then honestly it would not bother me if the black guy got it to due his race.
does it suck for me? sure. Is it morally right? no. But it would suck far more if the black guy didnt get the job, therefore the practical solution is to give it to him. Really it would only bother me if i was the better candidate and he still got it. But every person is different.
In terms of if double stanards are moral or not, i would say that all double standards are immoral. However, since the question is are all double standards unneccessary, it is a different question. The typical media/TV stereotype of intelligent female, stupid male in comedy is also immoral, but it makes me laugh. Therefore, is removing this the right course of action if it means that our lives could be lesser for it? Personal opinion only here, but the negatives of the double standard are negated by the positives of this particular double standard (I will leave arguing the upsides and downsides of this particular double standard when it comes to women to someone else).
I'm not trying to be mean, but I'm starting to think that only about half the people here know what a double standard is. I'm not personally attacking any of the people I quote here, I'm just giving examples. For instance:
Twilight_guy said:
Male and female sports teams. Men and women have biological differences that make inter-gender sports seem unfair. If men are a little stronger just because they have a Y chromosome, how is that fair to the female athletes? Male and female restrooms are another one too, although I'm not totally sold that its a necessity only that in my society its a necessity.
It's not complicated at all. A person with a dick goes to the mens' rooms and a person with a vagina goes to the lady's room. Your sexual identity is irrelevant.
These are not examples of double standards. These are examples of segregation. Basically the concept that people from group A go here, while people from group B go there. What both groups do in wherever they are placed is considered irrelevant, as long as they remain in their respective positions or locations.
Skratt said:
Childcare is one of those things that I've read too many news articles about children being cared for by creeps. I don't care if it's right or wrong, but men just need to pick a different profession other than childcare because I will never be comfortable with it. Is it fair? Probably not, but since you can't tell which pool has been proverbially pissed in, it's best not swim in any of them.
Positive discrimination in the work-place (i.e if two applications for a certain job is equal, and the interview with the two goes equally well, the job should go to whoever is getting said positive discrimination. Usually female, but male as well in some areas, like childcare), until we reach an equal enough society where it isn't needed.
These are not examples of double standards, these are examples of discrimination. Basically the concept that people from group A, are automatically better suited to a certain skill or position than someone from group B. On a side note, as already pointed out a couple of times, I hate the term "positive discrimination". If a woman is hired instead of a man, and the only deciding factor in the decision is gender, than the employers are not discriminating for the woman, they are discriminating against the man.
On the other hand:
Relish in Chaos said:
Which double standards do you think are necessary? I was just thinking about how female-on-male sexual harassment is often used as a topic of humour for sitcoms, but if it wasn't funny to so many, it wouldn't be used, would it? Admittedly, that kind of sexual harassment is pretty rare. So I'm not sure whether or not it's bad for them to use it, even if it is a double standard.
See, these are examples of double standards. A double standard is when a certain action performed by group A elicits a different response than if the exact same action was performed by group B. And no, I don't think any double standards are acceptable. They tend to promote a horrid values dissonance in culture. Think if Tony would have given all he had in his Taekwondo class and had thoroughly trashed the girl he was sparring against. He would been viewed as a giant asshole. Now, if the girl had given him the beating of a lifetime, she'd be commended on how well she did. As far as the OP's post, I completely agree with that. Sexual harassment can make it just as uncomfortable for a man to go to work as a woman, but pop-culture tends to view female on male harassment as humorous, while male on female as despicable. This is even worse for assault. Suppose a man is saying horrible vile things to a woman and she turns around and punches him in the face. The general reaction? "You go girl!" A man punches a woman under the exact same circumstances? "Lock him up forever!" Men have a hard time when their wife is beating on them, because they'll generally just get laughed at, and are even afraid to defend themselves for the fear that they will be the ones getting jailed as a result.
Personally I find those women incredibly pervy, but you can help but agree with what's written there.
I don't think there are any necessary double-standards simply because if something is necessary (separate sex bathrooms, sports teams, etc) it isn't really a double standard.
And as much as i oppose discriminating against transexuals, they should simply go to the room they currently have the parts for. Just like everyone else.
Except, the problem is when we get a trans person who looks exactly like their identified gender, they just don't have the right genitals. What's safer for them, to go into the changing room for the other gender, or the one for the gender they identify with?
Plus, whenever you enforce a rule like that, it ends up only affecting those trans people who can't pass, since those who can pass will never be questioned.
It's not as if they're actually watching you use the toilet. So, I don't really see the problem in letting a transgender person enter the restroom of the gender they identify with.
Positive discrimination in the work-place (i.e if two applications for a certain job is equal, and the interview with the two goes equally well, the job should go to whoever is getting said positive discrimination. Usually female, but male as well in some areas, like childcare), until we reach an equal enough society where it isn't needed.
There is only so many times you can watch someone who is at best vastly inferior and usually incompetent get promoted ahead of you and end up with you having to carry their dead weight simply because they are a minority until the discrimination leads you to hate them for it.
were talking about positive discrimination, yours is a fantasy world mine is how it actually turned out to be and the conclusion stands. this is why my post contained a counter explanation of the idea and a reason why its wrong at its core.
Positive discrimination in the work-place (i.e if two applications for a certain job is equal, and the interview with the two goes equally well, the job should go to whoever is getting said positive discrimination. Usually female, but male as well in some areas, like childcare), until we reach an equal enough society where it isn't needed.
There is only so many times you can watch someone who is at best vastly inferior and usually incompetent get promoted ahead of you and end up with you having to carry their dead weight simply because they are a minority until the discrimination leads you to hate them for it.
were talking about positive discrimination, yours is a fantasy world mine is how it actually turned out to be and the conclusion stands. this is why my post contained a counter explanation of the idea and a reason why its wrong at its core.
Mine is a situation a described as where positive discrimination would be valid. The fact that it rarely happens as it is supposed to happen (i.e that morons get promoted just because they are a different gender) doesn't invalidate the premise that when it happens correctly, it is a good thing.
Why? Why is discrimination a "good thing"?
God, big picture, people, BIG PICTURE. Sometimes, you have to do something bad in the short turn to have a great yield in the long run. If an more equal society is beneficial, then having to do some short-term discrimination to get long-term greater levels of equality is acceptable.
What is that, I hear? Fifty angry posters screaming "HEY! THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN!".
Well, alright, you can join the debate, after you read this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_Level:_Why_More_Equal_Societies_Almost_Always_Do_Better
Now you can either claim that the research done is incorrect, or you can drop the issue.
If you want to claim that the research is incorrect, then I doubt I can rationally convince you otherwise, and we will simply have to agree to disagree (and you will have to continue be bitter and angry, since most western countries seem to embrace Positive Discrimination, and will continue to do so).
I'm sure there are others, but these are the three that come to me off the top of my head.
Childcare is one of those things that I've read too many news articles about children being cared for by creeps. I don't care if it's right or wrong, but men just need to pick a different profession other than childcare because I will never be comfortable with it. Is it fair? Probably not, but since you can't tell which pool has been proverbially pissed in, it's best not swim in any of them.
As someone who works with kids, this makes me sad.
I've worked with a few guys and they're not creepy at all, but they get bad looks just because they are men.
They are every bit as capable and while there have been some horror stories there are many more men who work with children simply because they enjoy doing so. Not to mention nurseries are always on the lookout for abuse and have pages and pages of protocol about what to do if a child even hints at it.
I can certainly understand your view. Another poster actually asked me what the fuck is wrong with me for holding that view. It's none of their fucking business. Let's just say I still don't know how to tell the difference between a perfectly acceptable man who likes being around kids and a creep who seeks them out. If I could, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I wish my views on this were not tainted by personal experience, but they are. It's not fair that even one man has to live with the problems caused by something some other asshole did.
I would never advocate that men be banned or outlawed from childcare, but until I am exposed to Gamma radiation and get a mind reading super power, it's not something I am ever going to be comfortable with.
Just for the record, I am referring specifically to child care - baby sitting, nanny, child care center workers and the like, not men who work with school age kids. Once the kids can talk I'm not as uncomfortable with the situation.
I don't even know.
Not using high caliber ballistic and chemical weapons against enemy?
Why double standard?
If you kill enemy soldier with small caliber bullets most media will not give a shit.
But post pictures of someone ripped to shreds by anti-personnel weapons or burnt to crisp with napalm and there will be huge uproar.
Why it is dumb?
Who cares how person dies? When you die you die. Simple as that.
Don't stage holly rage just because your belief that war isn't messy was proven wrong.
Why it is necessary?
Saving resources and money.
Also chemical weapons have high level of collateral damage.
Any other acceptable double-standards?
There is nothing else I can think of.
Mine is a situation a described as where positive discrimination would be valid. The fact that it rarely happens as it is supposed to happen (i.e that morons get promoted just because they are a different gender) doesn't invalidate the premise that when it happens correctly, it is a good thing.
Why? Why is discrimination a "good thing"?
God, big picture, people, BIG PICTURE. Sometimes, you have to do something bad in the short turn to have a great yield in the long run. If an more equal society is beneficial, then having to do some short-term discrimination to get long-term greater levels of equality is acceptable.
What is that, I hear? Fifty angry posters screaming "HEY! THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN!".
Well, alright, you can join the debate, after you read this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_Level:_Why_More_Equal_Societies_Almost_Always_Do_Better
Now you can either claim that the research done is incorrect, or you can drop the issue.
If you want to claim that the research is incorrect, then I doubt I can rationally convince you otherwise, and we will simply have to agree to disagree (and you will have to continue be bitter and angry, since most western countries seem to embrace Positive Discrimination, and will continue to do so).
I havent read the book but i did read the wiki, can i take it the book is pointing out all the benefits that come around from an equal society and a whole bunch of proof that it makes it better for everyone?
well we already know that, its a given. i dont dispute any of it. but it wasnt the point.
what i do dispute is that more discrimination achieves it, it doesn't it retards the goal. discrimination comes about through fear or ignorance, Education is the way to counter it not more discrimination.
Even if we change reality so that the discrimination only happens on equals it still does nothing to help its saying women blacks and other minorities are inferior and need special help. it still fosters an attitude of discrimination.
the correct method is to create laws that say we are all equal and treats us like it and education to the fact.
The only acceptable double standards exist in a state of nature. Like men being forced into war back when fighting was all about physical strength.
I can't think of any double standards that are necessary today.
By 10, though, you ought to be going to the toilets by yourself. I don't know any parent who'd argue against that, unless they're ridiculously overprotective and paranoid.
Or maybe there are just a lot of dangerous people around? Or maybe because the 10 year old child can be intimidated by the adults there?
If I were ten and walked into a restroom where there were goths, guys with pedophile glasses or anything that might intimidate a kid, I would go DEFCON-fucking-ONE and suspend all excretory functions for half a day.
Are you fucking serious? If Goths and guys with "paedophile glasses" (which is a stereotype anyway, and one that I, at least, wasn't even aware of as a kid) intimidate a 10-year-old, then they're the ones with a problem. And you're literally just going in to piss/shit, wash your hands, dry them, and get out. I must've been going to public toilets alone since I was, like...six? Around that time.
Skratt said:
Bathrooms
Sports Teams
Childcare
I'm sure there are others, but these are the three that come to me off the top of my head.
Childcare is one of those things that I've read too many news articles about children being cared for by creeps. I don't care if it's right or wrong, but men just need to pick a different profession other than childcare because I will never be comfortable with it. Is it fair? Probably not, but since you can't tell which pool has been proverbially pissed in, it's best not swim in any of them.
As if there aren't stories of women abusing kids. I think I heard a story a couple of years ago in my own city of a woman who worked in a nursery being a member of a child sex ring or something, and they found pictures of the kids naked on her computer and stuff.
Also, that stereotype's flat-out wrong. Yeah, maybe some children will feel safer with a woman caring for them, and it's true that there are more female teachers in primary school than there are male (I can only remember one male teacher at my primary school and, irrelevant or not, he was gay), but it doesn?t mean that they?re all child molesters.
It?s not as if most of these places don?t have protocol and screen everyone working with kids for criminal history and stuff like that.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
