fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3376 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3376 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

[Legolas/Gimli, Lord of the Rings]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Life is Strange]

__________________________________________________

10. [SPOILERS for Miss Peregrine's Home For Peculiar Children]

__________________________________________________

11. [SPOILERS for Daredevil]

__________________________________________________

12. [SPOILERS for Daredevil]

__________________________________________________

13. [WARNING for dub-con, nsfw, possibly underage?]

["Pawn to Queen", Harry Potter]

__________________________________________________

14. [WARNING for assault/violence/etc, rape discussion is probable in comments]

__________________________________________________

15. [WARNING for rape]

__________________________________________________

16. [WARNING for child abuse]

__________________________________________________

17. [WARNING for a whole bunch of things? everything? supposedly]

__________________________________________________

18. [WARNING for suicide - or well sort of the opposite but just in case]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #482.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 (nsfw, gif, gay porn) ??? - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Lady scientists? What'll Hollywood have them do next? Drive trucks?

Garbage trucks would be good.

fuck off. women do nearly all the dirty and dangerous jobs in society.

er, what?

Well, the dirty ones anyway. Domestic work, caring (lots of blood vomit shit and pus), cleaning.

As opposed to the much more dangerous jobs of construction work, industrial maintenance, firefighters, police etc.? Also most of the really gruesome cleaning jobs are male dominated.

those are some of the dirty jobs but certainly not all of them

It's the old MRA trope of "Number of female CEOs is too low! Number of female garbage truck drivers is fine, tho." Implying that we only care about *gasp* helping women!

It's a bullshit mra argument because women can and do do all the dangerous dirty jobs in our society already.

But they don't. They maybe can but they don't.

Sure they do. I actually went to get the oil in my car changed the other day it was all women working their that they. All greased up and doing the dirty work. Also I have a plumber friend whose daughter helps out with the business by crawling underneath houses and all that other nasty stuff plumbers do.

Just because you don't personally know any women in these professions does not mean they don't exist.

It's a bullshit argument but it isn't based on falsehood.

I don't know much about those industries though so I don't know if it's hard for women to get into them (I think for things like construction it can be but idk about sanitation) or if it's just that women don't typically apply. Which raises interesting questions as to why. I think those jobs - particularly sanitation - are sort of invisible to society, so it's not much surprise that feminists don't talk about them, but that invisibility is itself another problem IMO.

It's a bit like the topic of the numbers of women in STEM fields - it's hard to say if a lot of women just are less interested in those fields or if they are less welcome. Many feminists like to argue the latter, but a lot of them do so from the comfort of their self-chosen womens' and gender studies major so it always sounds a bit hypocritical, whining about the small number of women in STEM but refusing to go into those fields themselves.

Fair enough I guess! I have a biology degree so I'm not coming from quite the same place with the STEM thing.

Ultimately though the more traditional sciences, especially life science and chemistry, give me the impression of already being pretty welcoming of women. I think it's technology that's still more unbalanced, and while I've been mildly interested in the past couple of years in getting into that, I'm way too in debt to think about getting any more training or classes in. :/

However, it's valid to make a point about STEM even if you're not in it - but a however to my however, I think women who do pursue those degrees and careers hold more weight in that discussion.

It's really telling that feminists only fight for equality in shiny, great and very well paying job fields.

Really? The only thing it tells me is that you're bad at logic.

How?

What's " really telling" here is that you clearly know squat about feminism. Feminists of all stripes have long agitated for, e.g. minimum wage, as women are clustered in low pay occupations.

No, what's "really telling" is how you're reading a whole MRA fight into what was a joke comment. It tells me everything I already knew about feminism: it's not about equality; it's a gender war. Feminists and MRAs are basically the same people.

So how does one fight for equality if attempting to do so is, in your mind, pitting yourself against the other gender purposefully and trying to start a war? (which btw is utter horseshit)

Edited 2016-04-02 14:08 (UTC)

*boggles*

Are we still talking about a movie? I made a joke comment because I think feminism's obsession with entertainment media is absurd, and I think this film is a perfect example of that. I had no idea it would turn into a gender war about occupational hazards FFS.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-04-02 14:35 (UTC) - Expand

diet_poison - 2016-04-05 00:23 (UTC) - Expand

If feminists are fighting for equality, then why do they willfully ignore inequalities that didn't apply to them? And why does pointing out this inconsistency automatically get one labeled an MRA?

(Anonymous) - 2016-04-03 00:31 (UTC) - Expand

More men than women are clustered in no-pay and no-home situations but hey, men are so privileged.

No shit! Those tend to be the jobs people actually aspire to have in order to have a chance at support themselves and not having to marry a rich husband like the old days.

Yes, because none of the high-risk jobs are well paid and none of the men in high-risk low pay jobs can't support themselves.

Shhhhh, your grey-area thinking does not support the narrative.