Female Engineers: Too Fit For The Role(vagendamag.blogspot.co.uk) |
Female Engineers: Too Fit For The Role(vagendamag.blogspot.co.uk) |
It might not be immediately clear but the article is talking about Civil Engineering which is a little unreconstructed when compared to IT.
And to progress to Chartered status for civil engineers you must have experience working on site bossing the navvies around.
When I worked for Dar Al Hadnasha (one of the big civil consultacies) we had to send out female engineers to Italy on an exchange as in the middle east it woudl have been impossible for a woman to go on site.
I find this behavior disgusting but it is, I feel, the answer to the question posed by the author: "But they must leave at some point and see wives/daughters/sisters/mothers/random women in the street.. Is the point less about novelty or even sex, and much more about straightforward intimidation?"
It is pretty much about intimidation and resentment by some and a group dynamic that forces others to play along or ignore the situation. I can't speak to the situation in Britain but in my part of the world I can say that things have improved substantially in the last 15 or so years but there is still a long way to go. Contrary to what anyone might tell you though, it is not a case of "boys will be boys" - the fact of the matter is that the management and foremen can change the culture if they want to, I have seen it happen, someone in charge just needs to have the resolve to say it won't be tolerated and actually act on it.
Here's a simple way they could deal with that - create a new company (or even just a new department within the company), hire only civilised people, fire anyone who proves to be an uncivilised jerk, and slowly grow that department/company to take over the company/industry because it's not full of retards...
Complaining about sexism then using "retards" as a pejorative is just too ironic.
Maybe the OP used it to make a point?
That's already two steps up from Mad Men territory.
And beside the crudeness, which is more a social class difference than anything else, I don't see how this differs from the reports of sexism in tech. At least she's got the (albeit clumsy and inadequate) support of her employer. They weren't advertising job posts for "brogrammers".
Being less crude than construction workers is not exactly a high standard for tech.
It seems that no one knew which guys were the jerks before because they acted reasonably when women weren't around. I think the same thing happened in tech circles. There are some major assholes and even creepy stalkers that don't really show themselves until women show up, so they go unnoticed for years by the male majority.
The described behaviour of men in the article is pretty damn sexist, true. But how is it any different from how men in groups behave towards one another? Just replace all the sexist jokes with gay jokes or sissy jokes or just about any other type of jokes men direct at one another to establish pecking orders within groups.
Reading this, it doesn't feel so much like the terrible sexism it's portrayed as, but more like reading about a clash of cultures. This is how groups of men organise themselves. I understand it's jarring for women and that women do it differently, but still, all I see here are men treating a woman exactly like they treat other men.
By the sound of it, she's actually being accepted into the group. Hazing is always the first step.
Turns out I dismissed the popup window automatically because 100% of popup windows are trying to sell social media experience extravaganzas and must be removed to see the actual content.
Turns out this blogging software shows its main content as a superimposed popup/lightbox thing.
So, if you end up reading the wrong article, perhaps you clicked close on the popup before it loaded.
I knew immediately by reading the domain that it was going to be a feminist leaning blog, and that's totally fine. Perhaps that's what their content is based on. Unfortunately there's lots of examples of men being jerks, so they have a massive grab bag to pull content from.
> If you don't like it leave
That's always the easy answer, and it's unrealistic and unfair. You don't know the conditions of the author. Maybe they have a boatload of debt or are in a situation where they need stability. Moving jobs is always a risk because there are things like probation periods. Even if you are good at what you do, a probation period is still scary, even more so if you have dependents.
Just because someone treats you like shit, and you're a woman, doesn't mean it's sexism.
1. Maybe they treat her like shit because she's new, and the feminine stuff is just one reason to rag on her. If she was a tall guy, they'd probably make fun of that too.
2. Maybe they treat her like shit because, for some reason, despite all this, she hasn't actually asked them to stop -- just complained about it on the Internet
A lot of people will get angry at me for this, because sexism is a very real problem.
But not everything is fucking sexism.
One wonders how things would be different were roles reversed--indeed, what sort of talk was common on factory floors during the world wars?
You may want to consider hanging out with a different crowd...
Also, this is not "hanging out", this is the workplace. Different standards should apply. Bullying and intimidation in the workplace is unacceptable for any reason, and in this case it's both bullying and sexism.
Yes, I know this is how certain groups of men behave. It also happens to be the same men who's jobs are in danger of permanently disappearing, and this is exactly one of the main reasons nobody gives a shit.
They must find something to tease you about, whether it's being "gay" , your nationality or just the football team you follow.
Unfortunately in this case in the absence of anything else they chose to pick up on her being a woman.
And you may want to consider actually being more truthful about what you and your pals do do when you hang around.
(Not to mention the irony of 5 lines below, in your same comment, using language like "gives a shit").
>Also, this is not "hanging out", this is the workplace. Different standards should apply.
Only for puritan cultures, that hold a clear distinction between work and normal life/play.
>Yes, I know this is how certain groups of men behave. It also happens to be the same men who's jobs are in danger of permanently disappearing, and this is exactly one of the main reasons nobody gives a shit.
This sounds like a reason to actually "give a shit".
Not sure how you justify yourself, morally, to care (or pretend to care) about "sexism" and "male jokes" while at the same time "not giving a shit" about people being forced into unemployment.
Secondly, there's the fact that these jokes single her out. She's the only one getting sexual and sexist jokes, so that makes her a special target. If it were all those men making constant gay and sissy jokes to a gay man, you wouldn't think twice about calling it bullying. Hazing becomes bullying if one person gets singled out.
Bullying with a sexual component is straight up sexual harassment. Maybe it isn't meant that way, but that's exactly what it is. A lot of bullying exists because dumb people don't think about what they are doing. "It's just a joke," they say. But it's not. It's the same joke, every day, from everyone. This is exactly the kind of situation where an employer has to step in and tell everyone to grow up and leave it at home. And when I say they have to, I mean it's the law, and they're going to get sued.
Also, the less direct sexism the writer faces show that she is not being treated like the men. The assumption that she is lost or trespassing because she is a lone woman on a building site is pretty sexist. Sure, women working on building sites are rare, but so are women getting lost on building sites. The whole asking if she was "fit" e-mail conversation was cringe inducing - and completely not how a man would be treated.
Men do not typically fear sexual violence from each other.
Not that the men on that site were necessarily going to rape the engineer, but it was certainly orders of magnitude more likely than them raping each other.
For the record I understand your point and you might be right, she may well be being accepted, but I don't think it's really reasonable that she should just feel OK with it.
EDIT: and tbh in an ideal world men wouldn't have to face "hazing" (bullying) either. It's a pretty poor justification for women having to cope with a worse variant.
Women do not typically fear sexual violence from men either. Any woman I've ever asked "Do you really live in constant fear from rape as the internet activists suggest" has answered with "Not really, unless I'm going down a dark alley alone at night it doesn't really cross my mind"
But y'know, going down a dark alley alone at night, I'm pretty damn on guard myself and I'm a guy.
For the record: I have always felt americans (and anglosaxons in general) are orders of magnitude more afraid of the world than any other people I've ever spoken to. Men and women alike.
EDIT TO YOUR EDIT: > EDIT: and tbh in an ideal world men wouldn't have to face "hazing" (bullying) either. It's a pretty poor justification for women having to cope with a worse variant.
Ideal or not, hazing and bullying has worked for countless millennia to distinguish those you can rely on in a tight spot from those you cannot. The more dangerous the circumstances, the harder becoming accepted by a group seems to be. It's just how humans are.
Just replace all the sexist jokes with gay jokes or sissy
jokes
What kind of fucking zoo do you work at?
In blue-collar workplaces constant ribbing and bullshitting is usually a way of keeping low stress and friendly.
To the rest of us, consider it a form of play.
All the jokes and insults you listed are extremely problematic and most certainly also deserve our attention (though that is most certainly not a valid criticism of this article, no single article has the obligation to mention every problem).
Do women freely express their opinions of men among themselves? Certainly. But it is my desire and care to avoid overhearing them.
"A female council boss has been suspended for biting a 24-year-old junior employee so hard that she drew blood through his underwear.
"The worker was taken to hospital, after the incident, for a tetanus injection.
"A colleague called the bite a horseplay that got out of hand."
http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/boss-bites...
At least in my experience.
When I responded with "I don't have a banana", she said that sounded like a personal problem and I was asked if I had one every day for months. What I can tell you from that experience is that women can be far raunchier than men - and in this case, I think they had a contest running to see who could make me blush or fluster me the most.
I've been part of the minority in other cases (race, country of origin, gender) and I think that much of this behavior is really related to crowd dynamics. Would the men described in the article behave that way if their SO was present? In any case, this female engineer shouldn't be hazed in this way and while it probably doesn't count for much, I'll still say "I'm sorry" for the behavior of my fellow men.
Let's all try to be a bit more civilized ... and especially here on the Internet!
And no, I truthfully don't hang out with such scum.
You seem to have a very twisted idea of what normal, civilized male behavior is.
Yes, it's "not giving a shit" about people forced into unemployment, and calling other people "scum" and "neanderthals" (after an extinct race of people -- might as well go full on and use the other n... word).
Swearing, holier-than-thou, casually racist remarks for whole classes of people (as if construction workers described in the article are "sexist and homophobic neanderthals" for making some comments between them in jest as 99.9% of the male population does, and one should "not give a shit" about them).
Way to prove your superior, non-sexist, caring and sensitive "civilized male behavior".
Retards, in my vocabulary, means someone who is not mentally handicapped but is a cretin. I could have used the word "cretin", in fact.
Sorry but we both know the reason you're using that word is because you want to paint them as being mentally handicapped which you perceive as "bad." You can pretend that isn't what you're doing but even if that is true that is how others perceive it, because when they hear the word "retard" they think mentally handicapped and you're using it as a derogative.
But yes, I do think being mentally handicapped is "bad". Are you arguing that it's "good"?
Think about your list of things to joke about. If you're not a straight, masculine, white, English man then they joke about whatever makes you different. Which means sexist, homophobic or racist jokes. If you are a straight, masculine, white, English man, then, ha, ha, you like Manchester United. It's not ha, ha, your mum's got cancer, or ha, ha, you lost your wife in a car accident. No, hurtful jokes only get made to people who are different. People who are like the majority get made fun off for having different taste with regards being a sports fan.
Just because it's a tradition, and they don't mean it, doesn't mean it's okay.
You'd also probably get made fun of more for being say Irish or Scottish than for being black.
Whether or not it's "okay" it is not something you could reasonably expect to be changed for one person.
I would think that really her employer should have managed her expectations better.
Calling someone who is gay "gay" is generally not a problem. (Depending on context it obviously can be, but that's then more dependent on the context, not the word.)
The implication of calling someone who isn't "gay" is that being gay is somehow bad or something to be offended about. That is as clear a homophobic statement as there can be.
It is homophobic, by the way, even if the intent of the speaker isn't there.
1. I was out with a group of female friends. Them being 3 to 4 females who have known each other for ages, me being the newcomer. I got the distinct feeling that men are walking penises. (granted they were all in their early twenties)
2. Living with my mum and sister (and female cat). Every day I am reminded that a man is incapable of tying his own shoes without a woman's help. We are these helpless sort of creatures you know, women only put up with us out of the kindness of their hearts and because we're good for a lay now and then.
I agree that women can be shitty to men. But men, in general, can be far shittier to women. Being patronised by your female relatives is a completely different league to having sexual abuse shouted at you by strangers (strangers who should be subordinate to your professional expertise).
And yes, I've worked in blue collar jobs (factories, as a cleaner, as a binman), and I too found it hard to fit in with that culture. But I had it nowhere near as bad as this woman did.
In the article men are making fun of a woman. Here on HN startups are making fun of lifestyle businesses. On r/programming Scala developers are making fun of Java developers. On imgur people are making fun of 9gag. The internet is making fun of Bieber fans. Bieber fans are making fun of old people. Old people make fun of young people. Young people make fun of old people.
People poke fun at each other. It's how we establish groups. It's how we operate. We pick a trait and converge around it, as soon as we see a member of the species who does not have that trait, we make fun of them and maybe, just maybe, we eventually let them join the group.
If you want to fight sexism, go to a country that hasn't given women the vote, or women are still treated as property. that's sexism.
Boy did their looks and remarks make me feel uncomfortable.
I also got groped and really unpleasantly advanced by a drunk older woman once.
Shit like this really does happen, and women are no better than men.
You should qualify that by where you live. There are dangerous places and there are safer places. America is a bit more dangerous in many places than Europe.
I wouldn't let my wife walk alone at any time in India these days but I have no problem with her walking alone in Beijing in the middle of the night.
The world is vast.
I'd be surprised if the most violent places and times in the US were really that different to the most violent places and times in Europe. However, what I suspect is different is where and when violence is likely to occur.
You're an intelligent guy, surely you realise that this can be used to justify any number of barbaric, animalistic behaviours. I could make up a list of lurid things society should let me do to you and your family by this logic, but like I said, you seem clever enough to imagine them yourself.
As far as I'm concerned this kind of dawkins-style biological reductionism represents the abandonment of enlightenment thinking and I will not stand for it. I am not an ape, and neither are you.
Rather than the typical corporate america style "rat race" where everyone is very polite but happy to stab each other in the back for their own aims.
The people who are responsible for hazing? --The ones that go at it with the most gusto? I've learned that those are the ones you should trust the least.
There is absolutely nothing respectable about hazing.
Would it be fair to rephrase this as "Americans and citizens of the UK and its former dominions have an expectation of public order that many other people do not, and are troubled when the expectation is not met."?
For the record, I (an American) have been held up at gunpoint. It did not keep me from being out and about late at night, though it made me more aware of what was around me. What should I have done to reduce my fear by an order of magnitude?
So has being in constant danger of being eaten by a large carnivore, why don't you submit yourself to that then?
You didn't answer my question. Do you think being mentally handicapped is good?
But regardless of your opinion, using it as an insult is uncalled for. Since essentially you're lumping people who already have problems in with whatever it is you're trying to insult.
The way I've always thought of the word "gay" being used in that way was not so much that it was bad to be gay (as in the sexuality) so much, but that you are associating the person with certain stereotypical gay traits such as effeminacy which would be somewhat insulting to a stereotypical macho construction worker.
The difficulty is when you put people not used to that environment into it, the real issue is a conflict in expectations rather than the exact language used.
That's true. But the traits chosen are not arbitrary. There are some traits which are consistently used to exclude people from certain groups. As a lifestyle entrepreneur, people on HN look down on me. 99% of the population don't care. Whereas if I was female, or black, or whatever, suddenly I find myself excluded from a lot more groups.
Yes, there is much worse sexism in the world, but I can't think of many people who would think shouting sexual abuse at your manager as anything other than sexism. You seem like an intelligent guy, but you seem to have already reached the conclusion that this isn't sexism and are now trying to justify that conclusion.
Why treat the symptoms, let's fix the problem eh?
I would never call a mentally handicapped person a "retard". To me, that would be an incredibly insulting and inappropriate thing to do. The only people I'd call retards are people who are not mentally handicapped.
Similarly, if I call someone a dick head, I do not consider that to be insulting, or even related, to physical dick heads... it's just an insulting term. If I call someone (a guy, usually) a bitch (e.g "Yo, bitch, pass me the beer"), that does not imply any connection with female dogs.
Btw, I don't see how you can argue that being mentally handicapped (which by definition means having mental issues) can be neutral. It's clearly a net negative. It doesn't mean the person is more or less good, much like missing a leg or an arm (aka physically handicapped) doesn't make the person more or less good, but it's definitely a "bad" thing.