Why Young Males Are No Longer the Most Important Tech Demographic 240
An anonymous reader writes "The Atlantic has an article discussing how 18- to 35-year-old males are losing their place as the most important demographic for tech adoption. 'Let me break out the categories where women are leading tech adoption: internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS. Also, because women still are the primary caretakers of children in many places, guess who controls which gadgets the young male and female members of the family get to purchase or even use?' The article points out that most of the tech industry hasn't figured this out yet — perhaps in part to a dearth of women running these companies."
Gossip - no wonder women dominate (Score:5, Interesting)
"Internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS." --- Most of these things all revolve around communicating with others. Daughters used to spend all their time talking on the phone (watch an old episode of Gidget for an example). Now it's texting on internet devices.
Healthcare makes sense, since it's usually the mom that deals with sick kids. Ditto GPS/location services since they are driving the kids around. And e-readers are handy to use while waiting for the kids to finish with their doctor appointments or soccer games.
I draw the line at buying some minivan or SUV though.
I like my car.
Re: (Score:2)
Definately! (Score:2, Funny)
It's a proven scientific fact that men who drive minivans spontaneously grow a vagina.
Re: (Score:2)
...or that women need more healthcare and devices to compensate for less ability to deal with the environment around them. The implication being that men don't need as much healthcare, or that they're better able to find their way without a moronic computer telling them what to do. See I can speculate too. If gossip is going to fuel internet growth, all of us should just quit using it now.. gossip is among the most toxic of fallout from human evolution to date.
Re: (Score:2)
If gossip is going to fuel internet growth, all of us should just quit using it now.. gossip is among the most toxic of fallout from human evolution to date.
Actually, that's not true. Gossip has been studies by a lot of fields (especially psychology) and is considered a useful way of communicating social mores and building alliances. Basically people who were once considered "non-technical" or whatever are using the internet as extensions of themselves more than ever, which is a good thing IMHO.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but unfortunately the basis is flawed. argumentum ad populum - everyone is saying this, therefore it must be true/you must comply. Building alliances on such fallacious reasoning is probably one of the primal causes of conflict and mass social failure.
Yeah it would be great, except that instead of extending themselves to what was built (by 'geeks'), they want/are getting it dumbed down to their level by force of ubiquity and/or profit motive.. This is an example of why some think the movie Idiocracy
Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of these things all revolve around communicating with others. Daughters used to spend all their time talking on the phone (watch an old episode of Gidget for an example). Now it's texting on internet devices.
The internet has always been a communications technology, and women tend to communicate more in both frequency and diversity of content. But it's a leap to say that means women are more important. A lot of internet traffic is streaming media and bittorrent. Does that mean those are the first things people think of when you mention the internet? Probably not. Quantity doesn't always equate to importance.
Conversely, men aged 18-35 have never been social movers and shakers; They're the grunts. Always have been. It's never been any different in IT than anywhere else... that age group is always used for something new and experimental because they're disposable. If young men throw away their lives in war, poor career choices, or develop work-related injuries, etc., we just give them a line about how honorable their sacrifice was and then lead them away from the public spotlight.
I guess my point is that studies like this offer neither wisdom nor insight; The conclusions drawn invariably reflect our own prejudices. And they will continue to do so until the social expectations of men and women, young and old, etc., are equal.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"Also, because women still are the primary caretakers of children in many places, guess who controls which gadgets the young male and female members of the family get to purchase or even use?"
"The article points out that most of the tech industry hasn't figured this out yet â" perhaps in part to a dearth of women running these companies."
Perhaps it's nothing to do with the industry figuring it out, but that in most relationships the couple have made the concious decision for the woman to be the homemak
Re: (Score:3)
Ditto GPS/location services since they are driving the kids around.
I think you meant to say "because men never get lost."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i tend to stick with HTC as they've never given me any problems so when one dies i get another HTC so if you get me liking your brand I'll tend to stick with it.
Nokia, hairyfeet. You are supposed to push Nokia now.
Adoption, not use. (Score:4, Interesting)
The young male demographic has already adopted tech, so adoption will be low. New technology will be targeted at people who haven't adopted tech yet, because those markets aren't as saturated and competetive. It was bound to happen in a maturing industry. Young males still use more tech then females though.
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. You see the same thing with cars though, and shiny new computer stuff. This really isn't a surprise by any stretch, rather it's that people who have the stuff they want already have it. Just wait for the *next big thing* to come along and it'll change. Well providing that they have a job.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. Who adopted internet and mobile phones and whatever when the tech was in its infancy (see how cleverly I used that word)? Men.
Curiously, I didn't see slashdot in the list of sites not dominated by women (and slashdot is a social site, isn't it?). Does that mean that we're all women?
Evident right here (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, there is a lifetime supply of slashpolls here just waiting for deployment! Just think enquiring Google wants to know!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Evident right here (Score:4, Interesting)
There's a new subject for a poll right there:
How many times have you gotten laid using Slashdot?
Re: (Score:2)
but they've been irrelevant in mainstream tech for a long time now.
Stop masterbating on my lawn and I'll think about giving you a job.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the tech field is overwhelming dominated by men, and this is a tech site, it's not a great leap of logic to conclude most who come here are male.
That's pretty unscientific.
The question is how old... hard to say but most of the reminiscing of the "good old days" here relates to the 80s and 90s, which points to people who are in their 20s and 30s. Of course slashdot has a firm base of people who think the good old days were the 50s and 60s, but they've been irrelevant in mainstream tech for a long time now.
If you remember the "good old days" of the 80s and 90s clearly, you're pushing 50 or older now.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the subject matter...
Music, for instance...pretty much got lame after the late 70's-early 80's.
Re: (Score:2)
If you remember the "good old days" of the 80s and 90s clearly, you're pushing 50 or older now.
I'm not sure how I follow your math. I grew up in that time period and am "only" starting to push 40 (though am still under). Anyways, Slashdot had its heyday during the dotcom boom, in the late 90s through the early 2000s, and it was dominated by male techies and largely still is judging by the comments.
No, but being visibly female here has consequences (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There was a poll... But it was before you made your account.
I believe you, but since I'm relatively new here, perhaps you could clue me in on how to find old Slashdot polling data.
Er... don't agree (Score:4, Insightful)
I have never met a member of the general population that liked the office ribbon. It confuses the hell out of my wife - which is a giant pain since it also confuses the hell out of me, who is usually her tech support. This results in routine 5-10 minute "find the option" sessions where we search for what used to be obvious. I predict a very similar reaction to Windows 8, just like Windows 7 confused the heck out of my wife and mom.
The whole problem with these UX designers is they forget that it is 2012 and EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS HOW TO USE COMPUTERS, starting from 8 years old on!
It doesn't matter if something is "easy to use for a novice" to computers when there are no novices remaining on the planet. It is much more important to KEEP CHANGE TO A MINIMUM. People in general do not deal well with change in something they are used to. Anyone who has assisted in an office-wide rollout of a new software program will attest to this.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY
Re: (Score:3)
Yep - it would be a real shame to let the people who know the most about the everyday support-ability problems with software to be helping with the interfaces. Nope - much better to leave it to self-righteous UX "experts".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cars, like computers, used to have a very simple interface and it was common for non-mechanics to do their own repairs because you could open any bonnet and point to the caby, the distributor, the coil, etc, under the bonnet of my current car there is a large b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This doesn't mean the slashdot population is wrong. The question you should be asking is "important to whom and why?" Technically incompetent consumers are more dependent and thus more profitable to companies. This article sources someone who probably has political motivations for saying the things she said, as well as being motivated by her employer (intel). In the end, the slashdot crowd is much more in line with the interests of these consumers than those who want to bilk money from them. the latter
Re: (Score:2)
Then there are those who run around said forums claiming the users are 'entitled jerks' because they have opinions that dare to differ from 'ogle-eyed worship' of said product/company/technology. pure fallacious shaming tactics at work...
(Also, all these people claim their friends and family rely on them for technical advice, even though that is clearly no longer necessary.)
The fact that these 'neo-friendly' devices are less serviceable makes them even harder to fix when their limited interfaces won't do what the idiot user wants. Guess who gets asked to 'make it work'? These devices are actually customer toxic.. They're increasingly designe
ah (Score:3)
So all the things I really don't care much about. They can have them. I'd dispute the internet thing (by bandwidth I suspect guys win what with gaming and porn). But otherwise: location based apps? I see it more as a privacy risk for little benefit, FB and other narcissistic tools: no use and I really don't care what my cousin's friend found funny so can't be bothered with other people's personal BS.
Also of tech demographic means relatively simple to use "chatty" services than girls might win. How about hard (for mainstream user) tech adoption? Setting up a home server, remote backup, dual booting systems etc.?
Back to the Future (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Conscription didn't instil anything in recent decades but resistance to conscription and desire to GTFO the military. The Hollow Force era demonstrated that thoroughly and well. I served during the Reagan recovery and
Manual labor sucks unless its for yourself or you get well paid for it. The cult of working yourself do exhaustion so you can get shitcanned next time FuckyouCorp right-sizes its workforce understandably went away.
There is no point in work without reward.
The elites don't give a fuck, the poor
Re: (Score:2)
When they do, they will have to deal with a nation half-full of slackers. Be careful what you wish for.
Everyone here will tell you that women have been calling men lazy since [poster's year of birth].
Male != Clueless (Score:2)
Re:Male != Clueless (Score:4, Funny)
Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.
I hope that's not the latest term for cross-dressing...the thought of Steve Ballmer in drag gives me the screaming meemies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does anybody really think that Apple doesn't know their market? Does anybody think Google and Amazon and Facebook don't know what users want? Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.
Sorry about the missing verb. I intended "sell to" but you can insert whatever verb pleases you.
Biology has changed (Score:2)
news at 12
Drivel (Score:4, Insightful)
This is basic diffusion model of business. Innovators, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggards.
Here's what I recall with the adoption trend of mobile device consumption.
It started with the geeks, and then the guys.
Then teenagers adopted it. Holy buckets, text messaging went through the roof.
Smart devices came out. Mostly geeks, guys and the group of teenagers. Parents were still playing catch up to why their child sent 2000 text messages and now they owed $1k to the cell phone company.
Social media explodes onto the seen. The teenagers are growing up. They are consuming and in turn demanding more enhancements. Companies are responding because they need to keep adding adopters.
Social media became a status symbol. Note: I did not say cool. Cool is attitude, not imaginary friends, followers, tweets, etc. Cool is measured in binary, yes or no. There is no magical calculation that establishes cool. No amount of bling makes someone cool. You are either Fonzy or Richie. Analogy stolen from Dennis Miller.
Now there are apps, web and mobile, for all social sharing for everyone. It is going from saturation to supersatured as the industry tries to secure all the late adopters.
The next innovation is coming.
Rinse repeat recycle.
Re: (Score:2)
virtual +1 Well said.
Disagree (Score:3)
For every 10 women who buy a GPS, or a phone, or a Kindle - there is a trusted geek they asked for advice before they bought it.
And those geeks are usually male.
Just because the overall market penetration skews toward women doesn't make them the influencers.
Mark Penn (Score:2)
Most important? (Score:2)
I don't know if I really agree with calling any one segment of the population the "most important demographic" in any industry.
Rather, it might be more accurate to say that technology has expanded beyond the hobbyist level to near ubiquity.
Just look at the number of people today who call their mp3 players iPods or smart phones iPhones, and I'll tell you about my mother who said I played too much Nintendo as kid - despite the fact that I didn't own a Nintendo system until I was in my 20's.
The listed applications are geared toward women. (Score:3)
No surprise.
Skype, voice, social networks: This is just a continuation of the millennia-old girl network, now happening over the electronic network. As a heterosexual male, I want to be talked *about* on that network (whether it be on or offline), but not actually be there.
Health: I'm a guy! I go for years without seeing a doctor.
E-reader: Most paperback pulp at the supermarket is aimed at women; now it's on devices. Inevitable.
GPS: Ask for directions? No way, I know where we are. I'm a guy! Furthermore, I don't care that it's a creepy area and it's getting dark.
I think you're missing the point (Score:3)
Damned if I'm not going to fight the imputation that I'm not responsible for the success of the underlying 'tech' though.
GPS - I was wearing the Casio GPS watch, I was dangling a GPS MMC out of my PocketPC (plus external magnetic aerial) when the luddites thought mobiles had to have buttons. Now I'm quite prepared to admit there was a lot of swearing, wasted money and bluntly it wasn't due to necessity but rather it clearly being the cool-as-fuck-future - and that's ignoring the pile of dead-end tech that was accumulated in parallel - but I really resent this slur.
I'll restrain myself from listing everything else - but there is absolutely no piece of 'tech' that hasn't been launched on the sci-fi-tinged dreams of a 20-something-year old male with slightly too much disposable income.
I perhaps do consider in these later years, that it wasn't 'me' but the age/ideal - I still steadfastly hold to the opinion that twitter is pointless - despite the bleatings of the youth below me and the easily-lead marketing execs above.
Young men lost that (Score:2)
::SIGH:: (Score:2)
Sure, tell me about how men are failing at everything again and how women everywhere are coming to fix things for us useless cretins who only invented it all...
Tell me again about how worthless men are and how perfect and truly in control of everything women are...
New tagline (Score:3)
"Transponders - more than meets the eye".
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
NEWSFLASH - Man walks and chews gum!
While that's true for trivial tasks, Man can't read (and understand) a book and write a software program at the same time without timeslicing between them. For tasks that require little thought, more seamless, continuous multitasking is possible.
Walking and chewing gum are trivial tasks that don't require the full coordination of the cognitive part of your brain, so the ability to walk and chew gum is more akin to an operating system offloading the TCP stack handling to its NIC and using a hardware RAID con
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Ever try to develop ambidexterity?
It's been my experience that my right hand responds well to rational thought, but my left hand is useless when I attempt to control it with rational thought. My left hand responds well to "feel"... the approach that is effective is to concieve the outcome and allow the hand to do what feels right.
Developing the ability to stickfight with both hands simultaneously required being able to think about what one hand was doing while explicitly not thinking about what the other o
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Interesting)
My score on Multitask 2 [armorgames.com] disagrees with you. Practice also improves my play significantly. After not having played for months I only stayed alive for 85 seconds and I fell apart with 5 tasks. My record is 105 seconds with 6 things at once. After a while it's hard for me to gather enough visual information to play each game, and they all use keyboard input which overloads that part of my brain. Towards the end I can "think" what needs to be done, but not cause my fingers to do so quickly enough.
I usually multitask when playing the piano. I...
* Get fingers positioned right (both hands of course)
* Decide on little touches like dynamics, stoccato, pedaling, rubato, what emotional content I want to convey, if any; I often make these up anew each time
* Decide on changes to the piece, like different rhythms, extra grace notes, changed chords, etc.
* Evaluate my playing--"missed note", "incorrect dynamics", "this emotional arc sucks", "I really like that passage at that speed", etc.
* Perhaps read music
* Let my mind wander, thinking about the day or interactions I had with someone or sometimes a math problem (to calibrate difficulty, I was fiddling with pointwise approximations of complex measurable functions by polynomials almost everywhere a while ago, and the non-null-homotopicness of a particular curve yesterday)
* Listen to people if they're talking around me or listen to TV if it's on; I can tune these out if I wish
Interestingly I can't respond verbally to someone while playing the piano. I can understand someone perfectly and think of a response (nodding if yes/no, for instance), but the verbal part of my brain seems to be engaged with the music. As a rule I can multitask somewhat on simple similar tasks and I can multitask to a large extent on unrelated tasks. Oh, I often juggle or otherwise occupy my hands while doing other things (eg. reading, thinking about math). I vary the patterns somewhat to keep that part of me from getting bored so it's not just tossing and catching in the same basic pattern forever.
If none of this is multitasking to you, you'll have to clarify your use of the term.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So you can't pat you head, rub your stomach, and hold a conservation at the same time?
That is not multitasking. That is a serialized activity. Setting up a repeating event and then engaging in a conversation. In mid conversation try changing the event. For example go from pat head and rub stomach to rub ... uh ... cranium and pat stomach in the middle of the conversation.
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Funny)
There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.
Good thing you remembered this nameless study, otherwise you'd have lost this argument! Phew!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.
Good thing you remembered this nameless study, otherwise you'd have lost this argument! Phew!
Good thing I can apparently google cell phone driving multitasking [google.com] in less than 5s and note the 3rd entry [nationalgeographic.com]
I may have been lazy or in a hurry with the last post. You, however, should please turn in your geek card to the next real geek you meet.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can tell from various studies, let alone real life, let alone computer languages, it all boils down to time slicing. Until someone demonstrates true programming examples or demonstratable neural behaviour, there ain't no thing such as multi-tasking in the sense we like to think it means.
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Interesting)
This article and your post are both yet more examples of misandric garbage being passed off as science... the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course, and who knows what your interest is, but I doubt it's as altruistic as you want the reader to believe. How many people here would believe an article written by a male saying that men are the be-all end all?
It's not about offense.. it's about these ignorant people demanding that us geeks dumb things down to their level even when it's not really possible to do without sacrificing functionality that we need. There's nothing wrong with ignorance btw, because it implies that one could still want to learn. WILLFUL ignorance however, is THE issue of this society's problems today.
Being part of a dominant consumer group is NOT the same thing as being tech-relevant, or even important in terms of trending new innovations. See, in order to innovate, there needs to be a group of people who are willing to take on early adoption. This is key... most of this is done by men. As to why, I could only guess that, but my limited understanding of psychology tells me that men are the ones who are more willing to take risks to differentiate and gain advantage. Read the list in the article.. all of those things had been used by men long before they were mainstream...ie when they were initially adopted for use. This piece is just an attempt at proving some sort of gynocentric ego.
On top of that, women tend to more productive, even if they play Farmville during work time. Men do the same - they just play some other games, watch porn or talk about sports with their colleagues. On IT field it has been discovered that women's ability to multitask is a significant bonus. Men can only concentrate on one thing at a time. If something else happens, they get distracted. This is why you sometimes see people complaining about instant messages and emails during work - they cannot multitask.
unbiased citation needed, from a study not run by people with huge political conflicts of interest. This is one of those memes that is a load of rubbish. It needs to die. BOTH genders have trouble 'multitasking'.. just ask anyone who's seen a woman driving an SUV while chatting on the cellphone.
Re: (Score:2)
YHBT
HTH
HAND
Re: (Score:3)
yes, but it merited a serious reply..
Re: (Score:2)
Concerning female multi-tasking, I agree; however, I know a woman who blew me away by multi-tasking. I walked in to my mom's room one time and she was chatting on the phone and had a nintendo controller in her hand. She was having an in-depth conversation requiring some thought and was playing Tetris. I forget which level she was on but the blocks were dropping at the fastest speed on the game. I stood there with my jaw on the floor and my mother started talking me too... while not missing a block. Batshit
Re: (Score:2)
men and women do that a lot. It's not difficult because they exercise different parts of the brain, where one task is theoretical and abstract while the other is immediate and tactically predictable. tetris doesn't require much theoretical or abstract thought, while yacking about relationships is not. It's like listening to music while driving vs having a conversation while driving..
Re: (Score:2)
'is not' should be 'does'
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Informative)
I'd planned a long-winded reply to this, but screw it. I'm just going to say that if you came in and made an Asian joke, another group of people stereotyped as bad drivers, people would look down on you for it. If you ever uttered the n-word, people would look down on you for it. But men will always have the allowances, excuses and bullcrap reasons to make as many jokes bashing women as they want, and it will never change. They'll always laugh when faced with criticism, painting the woman calling them on it as a "humorless bitch" as if it doesn't hurt to see it happen in a forum I enjoy and want to feel a part of, but is always faced with the fact that she doesn't have a bulge between her legs.
And it does... hurt, meaning. Say you're joking if you want and that I'm just a humorless bitch. I'm just tired of hearing this asinine crap, and decided to say something about it. I almost didn't, because I know the reception this might get, but I don't really care.
Re: (Score:3)
I've lived in many different places, and I have to say, you take this way too hard. Where I'm from, women are nearly-universally much worse drivers than men due to an over-nervousness behind the wheel that causes its own distractions, in particular when it exists but the woman is simply ignoring it.
While this could be partly cultural, and could be partly genetic, I haven't noticed the same statement holding true in other places.
I have in my time seen a woman on a cell phone take a left turn through a red li
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh, that'll teach me not to preview my posts. I missed a sentence in which I stated that while it holds true for my particular "home" it doesn't hold true for all, or even most, areas. However, because it holds true in SOME areas, it continues to be a comment that gets thrown around a fair bit.
Re: (Score:2)
OT, I always forgot TO submit, altogether. I'll go looking for a comment I made and say "Wuuuuh, where'd it go?" then realize... "Aw dang, never ACTUALLY hit 'submit'..."
Re:This is hardly news (Score:4, Interesting)
No, actually, I wouldn't. In my workplace, we all routinely sexually-harass each other. If I WAS the type of person you're talking about, my boss would be enjoying two hots and a cot for a long, long time by now. I can very easily distinguish relatively innocent humor from actual misogyny. You can't judge everything I do or interpret in life from a comment I made. You're taking an extreme and placing it on me, someone who's just tired of flippant sexism.
And as you say in your next comment, added to this, that's in your area. There was a case on Judge Judy years and years ago, involving a woman who tried getting out of a ticket; one of the factors she cited was that she'd seen him pull over "just women" and he was discriminating against her and women in general. As it turned out, they reviewed his pull-over record an found the opposite. Not by a wide margin, but it definitely made her look like an idiot. That applies to your argument; you see a woman on a phone make a driving-blunder, and another guy being responsible, and that means the stereotype is true? A tiny sample, not subject to test conditions is suddenly fact? I've seen the exact reverse--men plowing through a red, women being responsible. Many, many times. Each time I see this behavior, whether it's a man or woman, I say "idiot fuckin' drivers!" not "MEN!"
My problem is the proliferation of sexist commentary, everywhere you look. It's growing exponentially. To me, the flippant nature of it is almost more dangerous, as it simply becomes customary and acceptable. I've got a tough enough skin to roll my eyes in most cases and just let it go, especially on the internet, but it's still annoying. In the end, does it need to be said? Why is it "You're too sensitive, get off the internet!"/"Grow some balls!" instead of "Why do people have to act like douches and insult other people?" I hear this argument so many, TOO many times. I suppose it's more acceptable to be snide, snarky and generally mean than trying to be a good person, even if it means you're a little sensitive and taking things seriously sometimes.
Re:This is hardly news (Score:4, Interesting)
See, women in general from my experience seem to think that "being a good person" means being overly sensitive etc. as a sort of "well, I don't mind, but someone else might!". There are men like this too of course but most of them are gay men and the remainder are relatively speaking rare. Except in certain professions, such as psychologists, councilors, and politicians looking for votes et al.
It really doesn't mean that however. Being a good person means being there to help someone through a rough time, or to help someone that IS overly sensitive to understand a situation that may have occurred and help them through it. Going through life with such a thin skin as to be offended by this sort of stuff is not a good thing. I understand if it gets to physical harassment or someone gets singled out etc, but the rest of it is just sort of, you know, guys complaining about their wives/women in general etc. Guys don't have the same sort of crazy databasing of "everything he's done wrong" that most women seem to have, so we tend to generalize more. We complain about women, and women complain about men, they're just more specific about it.
Besides that, a LOT of men, best friends for years even, tend to insult and generally carry on with each other on a very regular basis. A lot of over-sensitive people can't even tell the difference, and I've had the comment said by many many women about some of my relationships as well as relationships they see around them, generally between men, of "You'd think they were mortal enemies".
A lot of this comes from men and women internalizing things differently etc... however most of the actual harmful behavior towards women ended upwards of 20 years ago. Right now a LOT of men are pushing back against conforming to some of this bullshit. Whereas the minority, the real idiots and misogynists were the ones doing it before.
Unfortunately this form of pushback causes some guys to just pick up some of the older, harmful ways of sexism, even though they don't really believe half of what they're saying.
We as men, in general, and not as an absolute rule, internalized things a LOT differently. I had the unfortunate situation of growing up in a family where the women are all understanding and have a great sense of humor, and all thought it was great that I generally tend to say the first thing that comes to my mind. We're also a family that appreciates honesty, even to the point of brutality, which also doesn't help.
This caused a lot of awkward situations as you might imagine. I sent several girls whose mothers I guess actually WERE like the woman I mentioned before off crying, without even knowing what the fuck I had done.
Basically what I'm saying here is that there has to be some give and take. We as men should learn to control our mouths around you women a bit as we grow up, but you as women need to grow thicker skins as you grow up. It will never work as long as one group or the other demands absolute adaptation from the other. Previously we had the women being the ones forced to adapt and now we're getting to where more and more onus is being put on the men to adapt, when we're already doing what we can for the most part.
I should also mention that men throw off the adaptation around other men, and for a long time the internet was 95%+ men in most of its dark corners. Some guys will push back because they're losing one of their few remaining bastions of sanity where they can say what they like.
Whether women like to be treated as possessions or objects or not, men are genetically geared to be hunters and warriors. Hunters and warriors that got us to the very top of the food chain. That sort of gearing is closer to grizzly bear than bunny rabbit, and grizzlies view everything in the world around them as objects to be possessed. At least 99% of us understand that women are not, but you've got to cut us some slack for discussing them as such, especially in an environment where we may not think any women are around to hear. Women for the most part ARE completely foreign, but beautiful, to many of us. Thats not a dig at the slashdot community etc, I'm married and women are STILL completely foreign to me.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, there's nothing wrong with bashing jokes.. In fact, it's a healthy way of getting the truth out there. Women do it to men all the time.. Just watch 5 minutes of TV, commercials or content, or listen to one of the many pop diva tunes made in the last 30 years. There's plenty of man bashing out there. There's also plenty of it in the law and education, which is where it really hurts men. I have a problem that men are being told to hush while women run around saying/doing whatever/whoever they want an
Re: (Score:2)
I don't agree with man-bashing, either. General joking's not going to kill anyone, I DO bitch about guys at times (that's so totally natural, on both sides), but when it comes to actual harm or cruelty? Nay. Just so you know. I hate hearing about good dads getting screwed in court when they should have custody over the idiot mothers, I hate women who'll smack a guy around and if he shoves her away starts screaming, "DON'T HIT A GIRL!"... all of that. I had a friend who confessed to hitting her husband and t
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Insightful)
I had a friend who confessed to hitting her husband and thought it was okay; I told her it wasn't, flat-out.
You talk the talk, but do you really transcend gender (to infinity and beyond!)? If your friend's husband hit her you would get her to call the police, help her apply for a retraining order, let her stay at your place or find her a shelter, find her a divorce lawyer, work with her to destroy him legally, etc. You would accept nothing less. When she hits her husband you say "that's no OK" and order her another margarita.
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Insightful)
When I see it everywhere, yes, I start to take it a bit seriously. And I'm actually a very goofy person in day-to-day life. We're talking either get odd looks or make people guffaw goofy. But when you've dealt with sexism, yourself being the target at times in your daily life, you don't really care if someone thinks you're humorless when you point it out.
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Funny)
E.g. Why do gays have such bad taste in music?
Because they play only Madonna at the meetings. It's indoctrination. I'm an ex-gay; I would know.
You see, two weeks after a young gay guy comes out, he gets a welcome package in the mail. It includes some educational material*, "necessaries"**, a copy of the gay agenda, and an invitation to the next monthly meeting. If he doesn't go, his gay license is taken away (so nobody will have sex with him; well, girls might, but who cares?). They all end up at the meetings eventually. It's like a Nazi dance party--glitter and leather everywhere. Anyway, at those parties all they play is Madonna. The leaders say it "encourages unity". The truth is, Madonna bought the gay industry years ago for cheap, before she became 90% plastic. She supports her career now almost exclusively with young gay guys who don't know any better. It's tragic really; I mean why would gay guys pick a female artist when there's so many hot guys to choose from nowadays with their YouTube videos and amazing pecs and delicious arms and... I mean, there are better artists than Madonna.
Anyway, I got out of that senseless life and am living clean. No gay for me, thanks; I like girls now. I tore up my license last week. My roommate tried to stop me, but in his tears all I saw was the glittery taint of corporate greed. I let him kiss me one last time, just a little--we can't all be perfect!--but I'm done. I like girls now. Oh, I said that already.
But yeah, that's why gays have such bad taste in music. So now you know.
* Includes: several pamphlets on jargon, at basic (top, bottom), intermediate (39, chibi), and advanced (chicken-of-the-sea, curry queen) levels; HIV/AIDS and other STD prevention information; a list of common hookup methods (Grindr, Manhunt, Craig's List local m4m section); a book on developing a lisp; several quick-start fashion and decorating guides; and of course Dr. Niederwieser's magnum opus, Bend Over!: The Complete Guide to Anal Sex for Men! [amazon.com] .
** Includes: condoms, lube, poppers, a dildo, your gay license, tickets to a Lady Gaga concert near you, a gym membership, and new jeans that make your ass look great.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, she was his principle source though: "The body of evidence amassed by Intel researcher Genevieve Bell indisputably shows that men's role in technology adoption continues to be overstated."
Re:This is hardly news (Score:4, Insightful)
>Especially in Asia where students and women actually really want to work in IT and are good at it.
Thank you for acknowledging that much of the problem isn't discrimination, but peoples' choices. It has always troubled me to hear people talk about how important it is to secure womens' rights, then in the next breath talk about all the ways society needs to impose different thinking on women and girls in order to make them do what we think is best for them. The reality is that there are not very many qualified female IT workers in the US because American women generally do not want to work in IT.
Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.
Hyperbole much?
Re:This is hardly news (Score:5, Insightful)
It has always troubled me to hear people talk about how important it is to secure womens' rights
I will repeat this again: There is no such thing as womens' rights.
Let that sink in for a minute...
How did you react? Think about that.
Now, think about this: There are rights that all Americans have. There are no special right for women, blacks, or any other group. If women are not being treated like people, then that needs to be addressed but it does NOT give them any special rights.
Let me make that clear: All Americans have the same rights. If any Americans are having these rights being denied, then that needs to be addressed. Giving and "special" rights to any one sub-group takes away from the rights of everyone else.
Clear?
Re:behind every powerful man... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's easier to control a herd of stupid cattle than it is to try and wrangle up cats.
Yes, but cats rarely stampead.
Re: (Score:2)
There's almost no stigma these days, not when 2/3 of university level graduating classes are female. most of the 'stigma' is imagined by feminist political groups like NOW who want everyone thinking there is. That way women will get the benefits of having the upper and has well as the benefits of having the (assumed) lower hand. It's dirty politics. Women themselves aren't that interested in tech. Women were never into the tools of the trade because the men did those things.. Women do other things, and w
Re: (Score:2)
Not just that...these days, the overwhelming percentage of stumbling, buffoons in any commercial or ad or comedy these days...is the prototypical, overweight (likely deserved), stupid white guy.
You never see a bumbling, butt of the joke, ad for a idiot woman, or stupid, bumbling black or hispanic guy. Nope, I can't name one, and please link me to examples where I'm wrong...but it is now always politically ok to make
Re: (Score:2)
That stereotype...even is almost nonexistent.
Kelly Bundy...early 90's. Phoebe...well, how long as 'Friends' been off the air?