Thread: Статус женщины в России

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

Originally Posted by Ramil

If a woman ascends to power she gets the traits of a man. She wouldn't be a woman any more.

i.e. if a man begin to do housework he gets the traits of a woman, doesn't he? Wouldn't he be a man any more?

Not to the extent a woman in politics would do, but yes.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

Originally Posted by Ramil

If a woman ascends to power she gets the traits of a man. She wouldn't be a woman any more.

i.e. if a man begin to do housework he gets the traits of a woman, doesn't he? Wouldn't he be a man any more?

Not to the extent a woman in politics would do, but yes.

I cannot agree. Many years ago men were hunters. They shot off mammoths. Indeed, It was a hard job and it needs a manual power. A woman couldn't do it. A situation when women sat at home only was right for that time . Nowadays, nobody needs the manual power to have a comfortable life. Do you really think that women less clever, less skilful, less capable to manage people (it is a mental work it does not need the manual power at all)? What is it "the traits of a man" regarding policy? The power to kill the mammoths.
And another point. To sit home and to do housework is a very hard job! I think that a man who has boldness to do it is the best man!

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

I cannot agree. Many years ago men were hunters. They shot off mammoths. Indeed, It was a hard job and it needs a manual power. A woman couldn't do it. A situation when women sat at home only was right for that time . Nowadays, nobody needs the manual power to have a comfortable life. Do you really think that women less clever, less skilful, less capable to manage people (it is a mental work it does not need the manual power at all)? What is it "the traits of a man" regarding policy? The power to kill the mammoths.
And another point. To sit home and to do housework is a very hard job! I think that a man who has boldness to do it is the best man!

And we shouldn't forget that in all likelihood the women sent off the hunters. There are strong hints that society in the Stone Age was matriarchal. And they didn't just stay at home either, they were the gatherers in 'hunter-gatherer'.

In any case, while there are role-models and I think everyone should be allowed to choose their own role-model, preference for one personal role over another should not be the basis for an assessment of value or rank. If a woman feels she should adhere to the traditional role, that's fine, if she chooses to pursue a career, that's fine, too. Men, likewise.

For what it's worth, the (few) Russian women I have met surely don't make the impression of being weak or meek, even those who do follow a traditional role-model, as well as those who don't. Not one of them ever gave the impression of accepting anything from any man just because he was a man.

Robin

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

I cannot agree. Many years ago men were hunters. They shot off mammoths. Indeed, It was a hard job and it needs a manual power. A woman couldn't do it. A situation when women sat at home only was right for that time . Nowadays, nobody needs the manual power to have a comfortable life. Do you really think that women less clever, less skilful, less capable to manage people (it is a mental work it does not need the manual power at all)? What is it "the traits of a man" regarding policy? The power to kill the mammoths.
And another point. To sit home and to do housework is a very hard job! I think that a man who has boldness to do it is the best man!

Nothing like that. But there are thousands of things a woman would do differently simply because she's a woman. I'm not saying that she would do worse, just differently.

What I am trying to say is that a woman ascending the ladder of power would eventually start thinking the way men do, she would eventually start doing things the way men do simply because she wouldn't ascend a step higher if she doesn't - she's surrounded by men and in order to best them in their game she must accommodate her way of thinking. As a result we would see a man in a skirt on the top.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

If a woman feels she should adhere to the traditional role, that's fine, if she chooses to pursue a career, that's fine, too. Men, likewise.

I agree completely

Originally Posted by Ramil

But there are thousands of things a woman would do differently simply because she's a woman. I'm not saying that she would do worse, just differently.

What did you mean when you mentioned the thousands of things? If it doesn't concern biology only It will not be right.
As for any mental work, for example, an employee must design a heating system. It is not important who is that employee: a man or a woman, in both cases they will use the same methodology and tools. I wouldn't say that they do it differently.

Originally Posted by Ramil

What I am trying to say is that a woman ascending the ladder of power would eventually start thinking the way men do...

Why do you think that a woman and a man have diffirent way of thinking regarding any mental work? What does politician who is a man do that politician who is a woman wouldn't?

I would say that women and and men do differ in more than just biological respects. I think there is sufficient evidence that their minds tend to work differently. Is it upbringing? I don't think so, I think it is at least partly natural. This is supported by the fact that male and female brains are wired differently - more connections in the female brain between the hemispheres, more than just one area to process language for example. It would be pretty useless if this different make-up of the brain (no pun intended) did not result in at least some different functionality. What a waste of evolution...

It is a fact, for instance, that women have a much better chance of regaining speech after a stroke than men. Men have one language processor, if that's gone, then that's it. You notice that at work when women manage to be on the phone with someone, talk to a friend opposite them simultaneously and follow an unrelated conversation on the adjacent table, where a man usually is so overwhelmed by the general chatter that he can't even follow one - their single language processor overloads.

It has also been shown that different ways to convey information, for example directions, are better suited to one gender than the other. Distances in measurements (250m), directional words such as 'left', 'right', temporal information is better for men, visual and geographical information (at the bakery, near the church, over the hill) better for women.

That is not to say that this isn't a sliding scale. Theories abound as to why this is so, and why some women still describe their thinking like you would expect a man to do, and vice versa. But there are general tendencies which you can observe.

Robin

I agree with you. What has happened in Europe feels to me as if the male norm is now the norm for BOTH genders, whether you want it or not, and regardless of the fact that it forces women to behave in a way that actually goes against our nature.

I am a manager at work (taking a break right now) and I normally have a team of male programmers working for me. It's a cut-throat environment: very hard and frankly, soul-destroying at times. The only way to get the job done in the way that my bosses expect me to, is to behave exactly as a rather tough man would. Only problem with this... I am a rather feminine woman...

As far as I know, at least I get paid the same as a man would. But frankly I am not so sure that business success is the way for MOST women to find happiness in life. I think I might have made the wrong choice.

Originally Posted by Martin Miles

"социологи давно обнаружили, что за женщин не голосуют именно женщины, полагая, что их место у плиты".

*raising my hand* I voted for Hakamada for president in 2000-something. I knew she wouldn't be elected because, yes, it would seem that in Russia women aren't trusted enough to become a president. Then again, there has never yet been a female president in the US. I think it would be great if there were more women in politics - perhaps then wars would stop and more attention would be paid to social issues. I'm thinking about Scandinavian countries here. Or St. Petersburg - isn't it the one city where teachers are paid the best wages, unlike other regions?

Originally Posted by Ramil

What I am trying to say is that a woman ascending the ladder of power would eventually start thinking the way men do, she would eventually start doing things the way men do simply because she wouldn't ascend a step higher if she doesn't - she's surrounded by men and in order to best them in their game she must accommodate her way of thinking. As a result we would see a man in a skirt on the top.

That's why we need more women in politics. The ratio men-women is roughly 50/50, so it must be the same in governing the country. Women are woefully underrepresented!!

However, feminism does not seem to be very popular in Russia. I know that most of my female friends prefer men to pay for them when they go out on a date. My best friend actually got into an unplesant situation in the US when she and another girl were invited to go to the cinema by two guys. Naturally, they expected the guys to pay for them, and when they understood that that wasn't the guys' outlook they just... quietly slipped away. I suppose men in Western countries are used to feminism and don't try to be chivalrous any more. Whereas in Russia women still expect to be treated as "the gentle sex".

To make a career in business or politics a woman needs to have some characteristics traditionally ascribed to men - she has to be active, assertive, confident and what-not. At my uni we had a gender psychology course, so we did this test and almost all of the girls were found to be "androgynes" (in the psychological sense), that is, to have both feminine and masculine psychological traits. The only girl who was 100% feminine was the silliest girl in the group - the only things she ever read were celebrity magazines and her only hobby was embroidery.

(from wikipedia)

According to Sandra Bem, androgynous men and women are more flexible and more mentally healthy than either masculine or feminine individuals; undifferentiated individuals are less competent.[2] To some degree, though, context influences which gender role is most adaptive. In close relationships, a feminine or androgynous gender role may be more desirable because of the expressive nature of close relationships. However, a masculine or androgynous gender role may be more desirable in academic and work settings because of their demands for action and assertiveness.

Originally Posted by Johanna

I agree with you. What has happened in Europe feels to me as if the male norm is now the norm for BOTH genders, whether you want it or not, and regardless of the fact that it forces women to behave in a way that actually goes against our nature.

I am a manager at work (taking a break right now) and I normally have a team of male programmers working for me. It's a cut-throat environment: very hard and frankly, soul-destroying at times. The only way to get the job done in the way that my bosses expect me to, is to behave exactly as a rather tough man would. Only problem with this... I am a rather feminine woman...

As far as I know, at least I get paid the same as a man would. But frankly I am not so sure that business success is the way for MOST women to find happiness in life. I think I might have made the wrong choice.

I completely agree. I'm also more on the feminine side (I'm a woman, too ), which is to say, I'm not pushy enough or something.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

This is supported by the fact that male and female brains are wired differently - more connections in the female brain between the hemispheres, more than just one area to process language for example.

Well, everybody can see it in a microlevel with using of some special equipments. There are some different processes of data handling by the parts of the male and the femail brain. But we live in a macrolevel, where those differences are not appreciable, and the effectiveness of politics belongs to the macrolevel.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

It would be pretty useless if this different make-up of the brain (no pun intended) did not result in at least some different functionality. What a waste of evolution...

Probably a human is not perfect yet. And maybe our brains tend to became similar. I suppose that nobody know a direction of evolution of the brains exactly : whether they tend to be similar or vise versa.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

It is a fact, for instance, that women have a much better chance of regaining speech after a stroke than men.

Btw, an ability for eloquence is advantage for any politician. So...

Originally Posted by bitpicker

Men have one language processor, if that's gone, then that's it.

I hope that it has a chance to change... see above

Originally Posted by bitpicker

But there are general tendencies which you can observe.

I observe one general tendency that a woman and a man are more similar to each other than it can be seemed.

Thank you, Robin for your comments

Politics is a rather dirty game without any rules. Not every male has the stomach for it, not to mention women. Anyone showing weakness (disregarding gender) will be cast out immediately. That is why only the meanest survive there.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Politics is a rather dirty game without any rules. Not every male has the stomach for it, not to mention women. Anyone showing weakness (disregarding gender) will be cast out immediately. That is why only the meanest survive there.

Ok. Well, politics is a dirty game. But who did make it like this? Who are those meanest persons regarding gender? We’ve returned to the start point: it is time to change. It is not bad that women begin to do political carrier and not only political. They say it is a harmful women’s emancipation, it is awful etc. But anyway women’s emancipation is the consequence of men’s behavior. The more injustice the worse result.

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

Originally Posted by Ramil

Politics is a rather dirty game without any rules. Not every male has the stomach for it, not to mention women. Anyone showing weakness (disregarding gender) will be cast out immediately. That is why only the meanest survive there.

Ok. Well, politics is a dirty game. But who did make it like this? Who are those meanest persons regarding gender? We’ve returned to the start point: it is time to change. It is not bad that women begin to do political carrier and not only political. They say it is a harmful women’s emancipation, it is awful etc. But anyway women’s emancipation is the consequence of men’s behavior. The more injustice the worse result.

Nothing will change. Politics will always remain mean and dirty. Women will have to play the same mean game in order to stay afloat. Women in politics has to be meaner and dirtier than men surrounding her. You're asking about who are these meanest persons? Well, just look at the top - who holds the power now?
I don't mind emancipation. Let them work wherever men work: mines, roadbuilding - everywhere, I just don't understand whatever for?

Originally Posted by Johanna

Originally Posted by Martin Miles

In Sweden where I come from, Russian guys have the image of being very macho, .

That's only because Swedish guys have become such feminized wimps! Russian guys are "normal."

Originally Posted by ekaterinak

Nowadays, nobody needs the manual power to have a comfortable life.

You only "think" this because you are not a man and you did not grow up as a man. You don't know what is like to fight for your position amongst peers from an early age as a male. You don't know what it is like to get a punch in the face because you looked the 'wrong way" at someone else.

Well how about overhearing your boss announce to the world that you were only hired because you are good-looking (despite that being blatantly false) or having your looks judged every time you go out.

Sometimes I seriously wonder if the moslem women aren't onto something rather clever when they cover up.

It's a vastly unfair lottery or a game which everyone loses sooner or later. Many women live their entire lives hating themselves because they are less attractive than average.

These feelings can hurt (I think) just as much as a punch on the nose.
And with women working professionally they have to be competitive in exactly the same way as men despite the fact that it doesn't come naturally to most of us.

Originally Posted by DDT

That's only because Swedish guys have become such feminized wimps! Russian guys are "normal."

Well feminine or not -- if you say that to their face I think you might get one of the punches you mention in your other post! They tend to be very big guys, so I'd watch it.

That said, feminism in Sweden has gone a bit too far in some instances, and it's true (IMO) that it's not exactly a turn-on to see a guy dusting the bookshelves in an apron..

Originally Posted by Ramil

Nothing will change. Politics will always remain mean and dirty.

Politics will not change if men be there only. It is true. Also see below

Originally Posted by Ramil

Women will have to play the same mean game in order to stay afloat. Women in politics has to be meaner and dirtier than men surrounding her.

Btw, women’s influence is very often positive for any man. It is possible that rather men begin changing their way of business than women accept men’s.

Originally Posted by Ramil

You're asking about who are these meanest persons? Well, just look at the top - who holds the power now?

I am not asking. It was a rhetorical question. Well, anybody can see that there are mostly men at the top. Maybe it is a reason, why the game is so dirty. There is a lack of useful women’s influence.

Originally Posted by Ramil

I don't mind emancipation. Let them work wherever men work: mines, roadbuilding - everywhere, I just don't understand whatever for?

I’ve got impression that we talk about the same thing by different ways. I can say that a place in the State Duma or in a parliament fits for a women better than any hard physical job.

Originally Posted by DDT

You only "think" this because you are not a man and you did not grow up as a man. You don't know what is like to fight for your position amongst peers from an early age as a male. You don't know what it is like to get a punch in the face because you looked the 'wrong way" at someone else.

Excuse me. What did you mean? I hope you didn’t mean physical efforts, because I mean occupations which refer to a mental work (like politics, engineering etc.). In this point, indeed, I (and most of other women) have never swung with my (their) fists to get something.
As for that “I don’t know what is like to fight for your position amongst peers from an early age”.
Men have one important advantage against women. It is that any man was taught from an early age what to do inside of situations, how behave yourself to get the best results. What would men do if they didn’t have experience like this? Women didn’t have that experience; women are grown up in air of double standards. On the one hand we must be tender, gentle, weak (like a little bird), we should concentrate our thoughts on children, perspective of maternity, marriage and so on. On the other hand we must be ready to earn enough money to carry about our children, parents and ourselves (I meant "себя самих" sorry for my English). It is very hard to run on the both roads. I would say that it is two equal carriers instead of one. Now most of men have only one. So I suppose that women’s life is not easier than men’s and any women's attempts to get a well-paid mental work are the natural way to facilitate women’s life. That’s why women will tend to politics and so on like this.

Originally Posted by Johanna

Well how about overhearing your boss announce to the world that you were only hired because you are good-looking (despite that being blatantly false) or having your looks judged every time you go out.

Johanna, now I learned to look at it from other hand. If a boss cannot concentrate on his job it will be his serious problem.

Originally Posted by Johanna

Sometimes I seriously wonder if the moslem women aren't onto something rather clever when they cover up.

No, Johanna, life of a Muslim woman is easy if she is from rich or wealthy family. On other situation she is a human of the second quality for an agricultural job and a way of getting children. She is completely depended on her men (father, brother, family) mood. The mood of human can be changed too often to afford myself to be depended on it.

I suppose that European (Russian too) women have a choice. It is a very valuable achievement!

Originally Posted by Johanna

It's a vastly unfair lottery or a game which everyone loses sooner or later. Many women live their entire lives hating themselves because they are less attractive than average.

Btw, nobody demands from any man to be attractive than average. I suppose it is additional point to say that men’s life is a bit easier than women’s.

Originally Posted by Johanna

That said, feminism in Sweden has gone a bit too far in some instances, and it's true (IMO) that it's not exactly a turn-on to see a guy dusting the bookshelves in an apron..

What a wonderful view! It is not typical for Russia! Вот это аттракцион!

Originally Posted by Johanna

Well how about overhearing your boss announce to the world that you were only hired because you are good-looking (despite that being blatantly false) or having your looks judged every time you go out.

Sometimes I seriously wonder if the moslem women aren't onto something rather clever when they cover up.

It's a vastly unfair lottery or a game which everyone loses sooner or later. Many women live their entire lives hating themselves because they are less attractive than average...

That's so true. When I was working in a bookshop, one of our girls -- a very clever girl, a student majoring in history at the time -- decided to move up in the company and become a manager. So she went to all the interviews, and passed the tests, and finally she achieved what she wanted... Only to leave her new place after just one day of working. I don't know for a fact what happened but apparently she couldn't stand the appraising looks of the guys who worked there and all the whispering behind her back.

ekaterinak, what makes you think that women will do better than men in politics?
They wouldn't probably do worse, but I'm not sure they would do better.

Originally Posted by Ramil

ekaterinak, what makes you think that women will do better than men in politics?
They wouldn't probably do worse, but I'm not sure they would do better.

It will be bad if women be there only. I support equal rights for this activity only. If the result which we (people) have now is not quite good why will we (people) not taste another way? Women in politics is a variant. Why not?
I like Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3han ... %C3%B3ttir), Helen Elizabeth Clark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Clark), Radmila Šekerinska (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radmila_%C5%A0ekerinska) I suppose that they are not the meanest persons.

Johanna wrote: What about having your looks judged everytime you go out?

Forgive me for straying from the topic, but I felt the need to give the male perspective on the question of masculine admiration. It would go something like this: Men are always going to admire beautiful women and good looks don't last forever, so enjoy the attention while it's on offer. Men, for their part, are always flattered when a lady tells them that they are handsome.

In the long run, I think all such questions boil down to the fact that men don't understand women and vice versa. Sometimes I think it was part of Nature's design. Other times I just quote the Bible: Male and female created He them, that is, there must be a reason why there are two sexes, a reason why we can't reproduce asexually as some plants and organisms do.