@Baldcyclist: Please stop digging for a moment. Do some more reading, as recommended. Some of your sweeping assertions are outdated.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Stuff
Poor quality childrens' bikes on sale
(129 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
One thing I will say in favour of the pink girly bike is that it does mean that little girls raised in families where these sort of gender expectations are the norm will at least get a bike to ride (instead of a pram to push). Hopefully she will use it to be epic AND have a basket for her rock collection. However, it should be one of a spectrum of options some of which aren't stereotypically gendered at all AND, crucially, the pink bike should be no heavier or more rubbish than the blue bike.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I had a blue bike and a blue pram. No wonder I am so confused these days.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Oh and having caught up with Dynasties, specifically the lioness episode, those are some seriously epic females.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Oddly, I thought men also had children to raise?"
Indeed, infact it's one of the decisions that I made when the boy was born, that at 5pm, unless something was burst, I was going home, and I have done that every day for 4 years. I gave up any thoughts of further progression to raise him, and given I was 40 when he was born that has essentially ended my climb up the career ladder, and I'm comfortable with that decision.
Now, for those that still wish to climb the ladder with children, male or female, you have to put in the time, people who work 9-5 don't climb. And so that requires sacrificing substantial time with your family.
There is a clear difference between male and female in terms of raising a family, and that is that the mother is more important, that's not to say the father figure isn't. In most divorce cases the female rightly gets custody of the children, it's accepted the mother is more important.
Now, when you have people who have reached the top, and are working 75 hour weeks, the difference is that the children can't do without the mother as much as they can the father, and so the mother ends up with 4 hours sleep nightly, and somehow still cope.
People are right though, my views are pretty old fashioned, I gave up my desire to progress when I had my child, and can't understand why others also don't...
Posted 5 years ago # -
@baldcyclist - you are stating your opinions as fact. The fact that you observe behavioural differences between girls and boys does is more evidence to the societal gender expectations we have imposed for years (and continue to do) than it is to do with anything innate. There may be some innate differences but it is impossible to tell what they are - ask a neurobiologist who tries to conduct experiments on the matter by finding separated identical twins.
What Raleigh is doing is reinforcing stereotypes - and demonstrably so if it is has a "girls" and "boys" section. It is not political correctness gone mad to create a society where we empower both genders equally to be as epic, heroic, nurturing, adventurous or caring as each other - it is demonstrable that both sexes are equally capable of both.
As for Jordan Peterson - in my view that contravenes rule 2.
Your view on parenting is hideously outdated and entirely wrong. I do the majority of childcare in our family - including barely edible cooking, incompetent plaiting of hair etc... to suggest that one parent is naturally more important than the other on account of gender is not a reasonable assertion. Even when breastfeeding my wife went away and I was left as the person who nurtured - I do not accept your apparently factual statement that there is a natural role of fathers and mothers bringing up children.
Posted 5 years ago # -
One of the things that melts my mental magma chamber is the assertion that things that clearly can be changed through human agency can't be and vice versa.
The entire joy of being human - such as it is - stems from being a member of the sole species without a nature. Cats cannot prevent themselves from catching mice and copulating with other cats. Cockroaches eat filth and copulate with cockroaches. Humans can chose what to do and what to be. The price for this freedom is knowing about death. Hard bargain - best make the most of it. All of us.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"including barely edible cooking, incompetent plaiting of hair etc"
That pretty much sums up my point. It's not that men can't, or shouldn't do it - my mother worked full time, and I was brought up by a stay at home father - but they are less competent at it. I have the boy every Thursday and Friday, and one in 4 Saturdays, and spend equal time with hm when I am not at work. He addresses me as mummy, em daddy, and if there is a fall he will *always* run to mummy.
Show me a man that cried for 3 months on having to go back to work after (m)paternity leave? They don't exist. After 4 years I still have arguments with my wife because I "made" her go back to work, my wife still deeply resents me for it. Men simply don't harbour those feelings.
(on the making her go back to work, it's important for the boy to see that both parents work, and work hard when they are there. also the routine, and meeting other kids at nursery is good for him socially - my greatest fear is that I will inflict my introvertedness
(that's not a word) on him, as my father did on me) .Posted 5 years ago # -
Men simply don't harbour those feelings.
Please don't pretend to know what other human beings feel.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"That pretty much sums up my point."
it does nothing of the sort - I am equally incompetent at virtually everything I do. I'll add to that list dubious welding and inaccurate bricklaying.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Men simply don't harbour those feelings."
If you can say that with a straight face then there is really no point to us continuing this discussion.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Likewise 'they are less competent at it".
Plaiting hair is not innate. It's something (some) girls are taught and (some) boys are not. Same goes for cooking etc.
this is an entirely ridiculous discussion.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Men simply don't harbour those feelings.
Nonsense. Even if it were true, it is not obvious, at all, that the cause would be biological rather than societal.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Men simply don't harbour those feelings."
OK, I'll rephrase it. After paternity leave I was gutted that I had to go back to work, and clearly given the fact that I have given up on the prospect of further promotion to leave at 5 to make sure I spend every minute possible with the boy, I'd rather be at home, than at work, that said...
After 4 years, I'm pretty comfortable with the fact that I need to go to work, and most men are. I never cried a tear when I had to go back., and that 'gutted' feeling was gone after a week.
On the other hand my wife, as stated still deeply resents me for 'making' her go to work. Financially she doesn't have to but I make her because I think it is good for the boy. `She cried for 3 months, and still cries on occasion now, she feels she should be with the boy 24/7, she does feel that calling.
I however will stand by "Show me a man that cried for 3 months on having to go back to work after (m)paternity leave? They don't exist."
Posted 5 years ago # -
Whilst I will leave aside Jordan Peterson (I'm not comfortable with those that define themselves as Christians yet don't believe in God), I am content to let the Bible rule on faith and conduct.
Which probably is much more inflammatory than any gender opinions! But to stick with the theme...
I'd suggest that female and male are distinct and different. Yet, as a father, I want my sons and daughter to exhibit characteristics that are stereotypically (and incorrectly) considered by society to be "male" or "female" (gentle, patient, analytical, caring, leading, serving, physically active, eager for challenge). Similarly their choice of career should not be constrained by their biology. Their worth or value is inherent in being human, that is, being made in the image of God.
Or, drifting further back to the forum's purported purpose, we can all recognise that recumbents and uprights are distinct and different, but they are both fully bicycle and have intrinsic worth as such. Despite their visible differences, they can fulfil any role, and it would be mistaken to suggest that some roles are only suitable for one sort of bicycle...
@Baldcyclist - should mean the heat is now shared somewhat!
;-)
Robert
Posted 5 years ago # -
@Roibeard
You'll get no heat from me for arguing with clarity and grace.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The great thing about CCE is it can be, um, interesting and civil!
Posted 5 years ago # -
@baldcyclist - you've described yourself and your wife. (for the record, i find it bizarre you would or could 'make' her work - but that's your relationship). but that is you and her - and clearly shaped by your upbringing and hers. it doesn't say anything about your sex, but rather about the way in which you have been shaped by those who nurtured you, and what you have absorbed from the environment.
even if you don't agree with that, I don't see how you can claim to know about all men, based on your sample.
Posted 5 years ago # -
dubious welding and inaccurate bricklaying
For the record I'd like to confirm that @algo is a complete klutz. I'm pretty sure he broke the Scaffolding Bike just by looking at it.
Posted 5 years ago # -
best check that clause in the frame warranty....
Posted 5 years ago # -
"i find it bizarre you would or could 'make' her work"
That's true, I couldn't force her out the door, however we had a frank discussion, and on balance I won that argument, and continued to win periodic arguments with her, her mother, her sister, her dad. The fact most of the neighbours are stay at home mums doesn't help either.
I lose my fair share of arguments about other things, I hope our house s mostly democratic.
"but rather about the way in which you have been shaped by those who nurtured you, and what you have absorbed from the environment."
That is the case with everyone, as @Algo also describes his situation for example. That is not to say that either position is wrong, and actually to state either is, is well, wrong.
However, when you generalise at a population, and global level, it is clear that there are inherent differences between male and female, which are not just biological. I think I've been balanced and stated the things where generally women are better, or more competent. I don't think I have given a single example of things that men are better at, though clearly they do exist.
Both genders are better at things, that is not to say one is more equal than the other, just that in an equitable society, tasks are (mostly) shared out based on competence, like it or not.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Can I make a plea for clarity of language? I see 'sex' and 'gender' as quite different things. For me;
Sex is set by chromosomal makeup. In humans XX is female and XY is male. Not all humans are XX or XY. Sex is a matter of biology.
Gender is a social construct. It is only tangentially linked to chromosomes and reproduction. Not all humans have a gender. Gender is a matter of opinion.
In cycling there are sex differences like saddle shape and gender differences like paint colour.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@iwrats I agree with most of that.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Both genders are better at things, that is not to say one is more equal than the other, just that in an equitable society, tasks are (mostly) shared out based on competence, like it or not.“.
How. Very. Convenient.
BTW I appreciate on the whole the assumption of civility in forum but, uh, sometimes when you prioritise politeness you essentially say "getting angry at egregious sexist claptrap is just as bad as spouting it".
Posted 5 years ago # -
@SRD
Tricky though, innit?
Posted 5 years ago # -
sex = gender.
If you are talking about a male dog, you are talking about it's gender. Dogs don't care for colour.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"sex = gender"
that explains why this conversation makes no sense. you're using a definition of sex which no dictionary/encyclopedia/medical school would recognise.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Ok, would it please you more if I said:
“Both sexes are better at things, that is not to say one is more equal than the other, just that in an equitable society, tasks are (mostly) shared out based on competence, like it or not.“
Posted 5 years ago # -
@Baldcyclist You may be neglecting to appreciate quite how early cultural weightings start infiltrating babies' cognition.
Does anyone know of any equitable societies we could examine?
Posted 5 years ago # -
"@Baldcyclist You may be neglecting to appreciate quite how early cultural weightings start infiltrating babies' cognition."
Not at all, by age 4, you should have well socialised your child - I go back to my being an introvert, I can't let that happen to him and hold him back. Also things like discipline, routine, order need to be instilled by age 4. If they are not the child will struggle to find their place in society.
So, before 4.
The girls next door, are a really good example of this. They are always well presented, do well at school, and are really polite. I don't agree with the father going away to work all week, only to return on a Friday evening at 9pm, I couldn't make that sacrifice, even for the salary he is on.
The boy two doors along has had a less ordered upbringing, he comes into the house and makes a mess, and leaves it all behind after he's left, the girls never do that.
I predict the 2 girls next door will do better in life.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
