The ‘Woman Card’ Brings a Wealth of Disadvantages

[niyad]

The ‘Woman Card’ Brings a Wealth of Disadvantages

?itok=EkO7lp-I
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, on stage with actress Jamie Lee Curtis at left, reacts during a campaign event Tuesday in Buena Park, Calif. (Photo: John Locher / AP)

“If Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5 percent of the vote …” Donald Trump asserted back in April, adding: “The only thing she’s got going is the woman’s card.” Sadly, his remark did not only reflect his own sexist views. Apparently, there are plenty of Americans who believe that womanhood is an advantage when it comes to running for the highest office in the country.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll published Monday found that the ridiculous notion that women are more privileged than men has serious traction—among men, of course. And white men at that. Thirty-eight percent of all men, and 34 percent of all white Americans—in other words, those representing the most privileged demographics—believe that a candidate’s femaleness is a trump card (no pun intended).

One can rebut this belief endlessly, by pointing to: women’s unequal pay; the lack of paid maternity leave in the United States; and women’s disproportionately low representation in political office, employment and media, etc. Women of color suffer even worse statistical biases than white women do.

But perhaps nowhere does the disdain for women as human beings become clearer than in the arena of reproductive rights. In 2009, when President Obama launched his plan to reform the nation’s health care system, conservatives invented the bizarre and wholly dishonest concept of “death panels,” invoking mass fear of government overreach into health care-related decisions. Yet Republicans have had no qualms about reaching deep into the intimate details of women’s health care, especially when they want to restrict the right to contraception and abortion.
Reps. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., have even convened their very own panel to examine the practices of health care provider Planned Parenthood. Despite being legally exonerated of accusations of selling fetal tissue, Planned Parenthood remains under siege from Republicans intent on government interference in women’s health care.

. . . .
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/27/woman-card-brings-wealth-disadvantages

[Orsino]

1. Yeah, it was (another) stupid statement by Trump.

Conventional paths to the presidency have long been closed to wonen.

It's just that now, finally, we have a female candidate who skipped most of the roadblocks and will finally reap some rewards for being a woman.

[bettyellen]

2. The point is that overall it is not advantageous- but it sounds like you think it is.

It's a lot of how the same people view blacks- expecting there must be some way their success was was unearned. Or easier than it is for white men? The bias is insidious, and not just among men or political conservatives.

[davidn3600]

4. I've never once thought that about blacks

I don't think there is any question that racial minorities have been disadvantaged for practically the entire history of the country (and continue to be disadvantaged in many ways).

But it's not totally the same situation with gender, especially in regard to affluent white women (which Hillary certainly is). Yes, there are a few inequalities in certain corners of society. But most of those can cut both ways.

To suggest Hillary is disadvantaged, is kinda ridiculous. The reason she's struggling has nothing to do with her gender. It's because she is a very pro-establishment candidate in a very anti-establishment year.

[bettyellen]

5. Wow, I thought you were kidding. You think women have equal opportunity - and even advantages

These days? Leaving aside the private sector, have you not noticed the severe gender imbalances that exist in the senate, congress and for governors nation wide? You'd have to believe that men are inherantly more than twice as talented to reconcile that.
I'm sure you're thinking is you or good guys hold no unconscious biases and judge women equally. I can assure you this is not the case. Countless studies have proven women are judged much harsher than men, in just about every industry and role of any significance.

[davidn3600]

7. Equal oppertunity is there. Social pressures are still a problem. But the gate is open.

A few years ago there was a poll of young children in Australia. It showed only 1% of girls had aspirations to run for public office when they grow up. Boys had far more interest.

The point here is that even if you break down the barriers and open the gates, it's still up to women to run through those gates. Men are not going to force you through nor will men support advantages for you to go through. You need more women to get interested in being leaders and running for public office and taking on those leading roles. When you got many, many times more boys wanting to be leaders than girls...what do you think that's going to translate to in adulthood? Even if you eliminate all forms of discrimination....if boys are that much more motivated to be leaders than girls, you will never reach the numbers in Congress that you want.

And advantages can cut different ways. Yes, women tend to earn less money than men when you compare paychecks. But men are the ones with the social pressure to make more money, work more hours, and take on dangerous jobs. Over 90% of workplace deaths happen to men. Most women won't do many of the jobs that men are willing to take on in order to make money for their family. Society feels it's the man's job to make the money, lead, and provide. And many, many women agree with that...even today.

[bettyellen]

8. What a load of MRA bullshit- poor men being socially pressured but never ever

Discriminating or putting pressure on women. I don't doubt you believe it too.
Totally blind to anything that does not rationalize our sexist history and culture away as insignificant.

[davidn3600]

19. We are all part of society

There is no secret committee of white men in some secret bunker conspiring ways to discriminate against women. Society makes its own rules.

[bettyellen]

20. Secret committee? What a load of ignorant crazy talk!

Men made the rules for centuries and you pretend otherwise- it's only slowly changing since women have more control over their reproductive choices. Men are quite openly conspiring to take those choices away- no need for secrecy.
We will get there despite the dinosaurs in denial.

[davidn3600]

21. Well I'm a man I never voted on any rules...I don't know any man that has

[bettyellen]

22. Who said you or I control those votes? That they exist and history is what it is matters.

Amazing you think this has fuck all to do with you and your friends.

[davidn3600]

23. Since many of my friends are women...I think it does have "fuck all" to do with them

Thankfully, those women aren't as closed-minded as most on DU tend to be.

[bettyellen]

24. We're taking about how society works, not a tea party you had. Goodbye.

[Exilednight]

25. Actually, his point has merit. More and more companies are seeking Women who are STEM graduates.

Girls (meaning children in school) tend to perform better in STEM subjects, but around 7th or 8th grade these same girls begin to lose interest and focus on more social science or liberal arts subjects.

We can debate why girls don't stick with these subjects, but you can't argue that the opportunities don't exist.

[bettyellen]

26. I'm not sure how you extrapolate from one area where people are recognizing a problem and

Failing to fix it. Seriously? Women don't want opportunity- you're going to stick with that bullshit rationalization?

[Exilednight]

27. Everybody wants opportunity, but why do they leave fields where opportunity is carved out for them?

[davidn3600]

29. I never said they didnt WANT oppertunity, I said they don't TAKE it

When I was in college in the mid 2000s, nobody told women to avoid STEM. In fact, the schools were trying everything they could think of to get girls to take those majors (they were like 75% men in those programs back then and I'm not surprised its not much better today). But they wouldn't do it. Most went to nursing, social services, and liberal arts. What else are we supposed to do? Force them into STEM majors with a gun to their heads?

Yet, feminists, like yourself, say the problem is purely discrimination...that misogynist men are pushing women out of those majors because they are afraid of smart women. That's not the problem at all! No one pushed women out of them...at least not at my college. They were picking majors on their own free will.

Just like the political world. Women are going to have to actually run for office if you want more women in congress. You can break down all the barriers you want....but women have to step up to the plate if they want to be the ones who hit home runs. If the opportunity is there...if the gate is open and women decide to pass....that's not discrimination.

There is a much deeper problem here....gender roles. And that's what I was trying to get at before you blew up into insults, as usual.

[JTFrog]

9. Remember, you are talking to one of those Men's group posters.

Just ignore their stupid shit. Skinner was wrong about trying to educate some of these people. It's impossible.

[bettyellen]

10. Yeah I just got the "women don't want equal opportunity" spiel , lol.

Fucking idiotic, wow.

[Orsino]

44. I'm on the fence.

Not sure how we would meadure the impact on her candidacy. I expect we'll see a lot of women flocking to her, but how could we meaningfully compare it to the people who have fled in the other direction for years?

[obamanut2012]

3. kicking

[bettyellen]

6. Wow, those stats are pitiful. So many deluded men. Amazing.

[Aerows]

12. And you can read my reply.

I am incensed about this, the more I read.

The fucking subtle sexism of low expectations is what is going on here, and I don't like it a damn bit.

Am I getting a tad hostile? YES, at this point, I FUCKING AM.

Hillary Clinton is not a fucking 1950's wipe it with a cloth housewife, that's just stupid.

I work in the field, and no one knows better than I do how male dominated it is. If she is to be an example to women in STEM jobs, well, let me say, I am not fucking impressed, and frankly, completely un-goddamned-impressed with her grasp on public relations regarding anything technical if she thinks this sort of shit flies in 2016.

[bettyellen]

13. I think it is bizarre men tell themselves women have the advantages at that level...

We are so far away from having equal representation it's ridiculous. Well actually it's more dangerous than that- with all the punitive laws being put up to enforce our fertility. Reminds me of the many crap medical decisions made over the years to preserve my fertility over doing the right thing for me. This country is damned backward when it comes to us. People believe whatever it takes to make them feel better about their biases. Bleech.

[Aerows]

15. And that addresses not a fucking thing in my post

You care about sexism? Great, so do I.

When Hillary Clinton stands up there and pretends that this is on the same goddamn level of using a gmail account, it is the same as pretending that it would be okay for Exxon Mobile to use TurboTax to do their accounting and then go "But we thought it was allowed."

That's what is going on here - somebody using TurboTax to do the work of the fucking Secretary of State. It was bad enough what I had heard earlier, it is far, far, fucking worse what I have heard in the last couple of days.

If I hear one more person call this sexism, or a right-wing attack, you might as well just ban me. This is worse than W. and the RNC mail server on a *logarithmic* scale, and I wrote Patrick Leahy about that one.

Am I supposed to just sit here and shut up, as a woman in the field, and pretend that it's "just sexism"?

I won't. I have too much respect for myself, my profession and my own integrity to go along with the program. I cannot do that.

[bettyellen]

18. I don't think it is about this one issue- not nearly.

I don't think this one issue is catching fire either.
I think it absolutely pales in comparison to what the GOP does routinely and many people give zero fucks about those things too. Maybe it's because no one follows the damn rules at my company either and no one cares or does anything about it.
Most Dems went along with Bush after 9/11 and hoped he would do the right thing. It was a shitty political calculation but the majority of Dems did it too. And Sanders would use drones, just claims that he'd magically be better at it somehow. I don't trust that to be doable either. I don't think either of them is anywhere near great.

[Aerows]

40. If you work at a company where they give no fucks

you don't work for a company that has federal regulations that you have to be aware of.

In any case it would behoove you to make sure you aren't doing things like operating chat sessions over company bandwidth, utilizing "personal email" and leaving an electronic trail.

[bettyellen]

43. I actually am aware -secondhand- they try and skirt safety regulations often.

They are in the midst of outsourcing that oversight because they know China will say yes when their own employees have said no. China won't even report correctly, so there will be less regulatory issues for them to think of. It's a dirty business and I'm glad I have little to do with that part of it. It's been a race to the bottom for a while.
Just saying that yeah, they have a playbook but it is largely for show. It's mind blowing when you see how seriously they tell you about the rules and then only enforce them when they want to lay someone off for political or financial reasons. Otherwise they ignore them.

[Aerows]

11. So does setting up a private email server

that has not been tested for security flaws, sat on the internet for months without encryption with *PORTS WIDE OPEN*, transmitting classified information that has the potential to threaten both national security and the lives of United State personnel, not to mention transmitting classified information to third parties without adequate security clearance (and in one case, explicit instruction to not transmit information to said party).

If there was one shred of this that had a damn thing to do with sexism, I would be the first one challenging it and ramming it back down the throats of said sexists.

It isn't sexism, however, and it pisses me off as a woman when people try to make this about sexism. "Wipe it with a cloth?" *blink blink*. Hillary Clinton isn't a 1950's housewife for fuck's sake. That's plain insulting in the first place.

Network engineering and network security is a male predominate profession. When I see horseshittery like this having the gall to pass it off as sexism, it pisses me off because it is another kind of subtle sexism that is far worse - the sexism of low expectations.

So pardon my language, I generally think highly of you niyad, but fuck anybody that calls this sexism because the only slot here with the problem is the one that had an ethernet cable stuck into it then set out on the fucking internet.

Sorry, I've just lost it over this whole thing. You people cannot possibly be serious if you think this is equivalent to running a bake sales accounting off of Quick books.

[bettyellen]

14. I think the stats have shown - and I mean before the server- that a certain percentage of men

Absolutely do discriminate and seem unaware that it is gender based. Every survey I have seen puts it at about 20%. They were fine when it's Biden, Gore or Kerry - all who have similar records. It's just her that has made them apoplectic. I know really "feminist" men who this is true of. It's a very visceral reaction for some.

[Aerows]

16. Did you actually read my post

and the context in which I posted it?

[bettyellen]

17. I don't think the OP has to do with specific campaign issues -but rather

That there is a certain amount of sexism inherantly in the way she is judged. I totally see it coming from people who refuse to use the same standards for her that they have used for men over the years.
I don't believe their reasoning, much of it seems personal and nasty. Most gave no fucks about security of govt secrets last year, as a matter of fact.

[Aerows]

30. I'm proud to be a number among the STEM women

that gave a shit in 2006, and still give a shit about it.

Evaluating networks and security are very different, dependent on the see-saw of usability vs. security, and require creative approaches to testing (as does maintaining in general - I've never met anyone with a turnkey network configuration), methodology and architecture. That's the large picture.

Her implementation failed at national security checkpoints in the following of these ways:

1. Architecture - OSI layers 1, & 3. 1. Hardware not validated. Hardware location not protected from heat (physical security will obviously not be a problem when merely considering the OSI layers).

2. Network layer - OSI 4 &5 Failure to isolate the network from attempts to connect remotely. I don't think I need to add that open ports has that in spades.

3. Methodology - 6, 7 - Presentation, unencrypted data sitting there. Application, malware was a direct attack as stated in the IG report.

This isn't horseshit, and isn't a sudden concern.

[bettyellen]

32. I get that you have specific concerns based on highly technical knowledge but I have to say I have

Worked with amazing people who have tech blind spots, seem pretty untrainable for it or are just able to do stuff their own way and not get any grief for it. I trust that it bothers you. But I recognize a lot of people who loved Snowden giving secrets to the Chinese and hating the NSA with a passion and suddenly this is the biggest shit in the world. Many of these same people gave Dems that voted w Bush on Iraq a pass for many years and suddenly it's he worst thing ever. If Hillary did it, it had to be criminal. It's getting old.

[Aerows]

39. You hit upon a key point, bettyellen

"amazing people who have tech blind spots, seem pretty untrainable for it or are just able to do stuff their own way and not get any grief for it"

Those people don't set up a server in their basement bathroom closet.

Would you set up an email server in your basement and declare it secure enough to transmit items that could jeopardize national defense and our personnel?

[bettyellen]

42. I don't know that she did jeopardize national security -

I know that some in her position never used email at all, or used it very sparingly. She may have been calling or video conferencing instead. I'd like to know what harm was actually done before I judge.

[coco77]

28. If Hillary would have just...

ran for office without relating everything to women she would not need to keep defending herself as a woman. Woman want to be looked at as equals (which we are) but every time something comes up she says it is because she is a woman..

In a lot of cases we don't have the same rights as men but she acts as though she is running to be the President for just women. Many of her supporters also seem to discriminate against men when they act as though,if you are a woman you better vote for her and that has turned away a lot of voters. I vote on issues not gender..

If we had five women running on the Democrats side would everything be about women only. Have at it.

[niyad]

31. wow, you sure have a bizarre view of the campaign she is running. absolutely amazing.

[coco77]

33. Me and many others..

you may call it BIZARRE but that is what many think,she and her surragates think it works but it doesn't.

[niyad]

34. amazingly enough, most people haven't seen that. one of the interesting things around

here with all the HRC bashing is how little attention is paid to her work on women's and children's issues, here and around the world. but hey, keep trying. we need all the laughs we can get.

[coco77]

35. I applaud her for all of these things...

I am just talking about her method of running her campaign. Too bad people around the world can't vote for her..

[niyad]

36. you applaud her, and yet you criticize her for those very things.

[coco77]

37. I am not voting because of those issues..

I am voting for issues pertaining to everyone male as well as female. Jobs,housing,global warming,among many other things that pertain to everyone no dancing around the edges,no policies that have no effect NOW!

[niyad]

41. keep telling yourself that. denial is not a river in egypt.

[JackRiddler]

38. Absolutely true.

It has nothing to do with HRC, however. Without it she's just another corrupt, neoliberal, warmongering male politician.