|
seiferguy posted:What someone is "facing" usually won't actually end up getting, depending on how the court session goes. If Hollyweed guy gets a good lawyer he will probably get his sentence reduced to probation only. Brock Turner also had his case heard before a judge who went to the same school as him, and gave him leniency for having a scholarship for swimming. So it wasn't just lawyers, it was "rich guy getting away with it because of old-boys mentality from a rich-guy judge", which is about as blatant an example of the patriarchy as you'll find.
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:It's uh, probably a bit off topic for this thread, but I'll be brief. It's through members of the Governor's Council, the local group responsible for voting on appointments made to the department, especially the board itself. Maybe not 100% relevant outside MA, but at least locally it has historically been made up of white male prosecutors that were personally acquainted with the governor and were willing to make significant "financial contributions" to the members of the Council to get their seat at an "easy, cushy job". Racism and sexism and classism were rampant among those who didn't simply recommend the maximum possible everything and deny parole 100% of the time - whether or not they liked and sympathized with the individual in question seems to be the beginning and end of it for many of them. This is an awesome write-up. Also, a detailed explanation of the need for gender (and class/racial/etc) inclusivity on parole boards seems like exactly the topic of this thread, and in no way a tangent. E: Although, per the post below, I'm also not the one to decide that. Lead out in cuffs fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
failing forward posted:Who mentions that before even going on a date with you at least once? I did once talk about Fortunes of Feminism as an OKC opener (it was listed on her profile), though I segued into talking about her bicycle. The conversation went pretty well, and we probably would have gone on a date but our summer travel schedules didn't line up. I got about as far as the end of the introduction of Fortunes of Feminism. It felt like the kind of work trying a little too hard to aspire to fit the mould of French postmodernist jargon. That in itself probably speaks to the challenges Nancy Fraser faced in academia, having to work twice as hard to prove herself in a world dominated by ridiculously pretentious men. But still, I couldn't finish it. (The deciding moment was reading a critique of a Nancy Fraser article by some WoC feminist academics.) Next on my reading list is probably some Marion Woodman, which is Jungian psychology/spiritualism mixed with feminism, and definitely not for everyone, but kinda in line with where I'm at right now. (I hope this isn't too centring of my male experience, but hopefully there's some interesting reading in there at least.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:I have noticed that most of the feminist thread red texts seem very eager to make the public know that the red text was got in the feminist thread in particular. That or the PoC thread. And ugh, they really do feel kinda low-effort. Deceitful Penguin posted:Ahhh, ok. Sorry, this comes up a lot here because in many ways racial/ethnic issues are not part of the official feminist discourse in the Nordics and there's surprisingly many Icelandic feminists who are completely unaware of a lot of the theoretical framework which we operate in now was created as a response to the white hegemony within early feminism. My experience of Sweden was that it was pretty far ahead of most of the rest of the world on feminist issues (e.g. the laws on family leave and child care come to mind), but hoo boy was there a chunk of the population with some pretty hosed up and dated views on race and immigration. Since we're talking internationally, it's pretty interesting to look up representation of women in parliaments. Nordic countries are pretty high up there, as are South Africa and Mexico (the former since Apartheid ended, the latter over the last ten years), as well as a handful of other African and Latin American countries. And then you go further down the list. Much, much further. Did you know that Saudi Arabia has greater representation of women in their national legislative body than the United States? Now you do.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
54 40 or gently caress posted:I did get my baby box and it's great, it wasn't an overwhelming need for me since I'm privileged enough to be financially comfortable at this time but it's an initiative I wanted to support and take part of. It is feminist as gently caress and I'm also glad it's becoming more and more On this note, have a story about succeeding in science as a woman. Connie Eaves posted:I've always been impatient and in a big rush so I wanted to have children early in my career. I was very strongly advised by my supervisor, who I admired and respected enormously, that it wouldn't be very clever to have children when I was pursuing my doctorate. So I didn't get pregnant until I was a postdoctoral fellow. Still, I think that when I did become pregnant it posed a challenge to my supervisors in their trying to predict how serious I was in becoming a career scientist, and this was exacerbated by my having all four children within 7 years. But I was determined to be very active in my career so I never took time off work. I only took two weeks off when my first child was born and one weekend off for my last. So my supervisors got used to the idea that this was of no real concern to them. (For context, Connie Eaves is now 70, so this is mostly describing events of 40-50 years ago, but it's still a bit  ). She is one of the most recognised names in her field, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Maybe something like a year of mandatory parental leave for each parent, which the mom can use during her pregnancy or after as needed, and the dad can use anytime. I think it got alluded to in some previous posts, but the Nordic approach is pretty close to this, with an added incentive for the non-child-bearing partner (trying to be inclusive of lesbian couples here) to bear an equal share of the childcare responsibilities. https://sweden.se/society/10-things-that-make-sweden-family-friendly/ quote:In Sweden’s efforts to achieve gender equality, each parent is entitled to 240 of the 480 days of paid parental leave. Each parent has two months reserved exclusively for him or her. Should a father – or a mother for that matter – decide not to take them, they cannot be transferred to the partner. It kinda also helps that basically everybody is unionised. But yeah, two (or three) years total would be ideal, since it would help eliminate the gap between birth and pre-K.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Out of curiosity, is this per child? Is there an upper limit on children before benefits are reduced? I'm always curious as to how policy handles edge cases. I'm not Swedish (though my ex-wife was, so any experience I have was from talking to her/friends/family), but I believe so. Apparently you can also take it any time until the kid is eight years old. I guess in theory you could chain together your leave over several kids, but you'd have to have them pretty close together (like, get pregnant again a few months after the previous one was born) for that to actually work. My sense of the society is that this would just be accepted, including by the employer. For additional context on the work culture, everyone gets a minimum of five weeks vacation per year, and most people take this in one run over the summer. It's just accepted that most businesses will be running at low capacity during that time. Come to think of it, this also helps a lot with having kids since it coincides with school holidays.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Rakosi posted:Only after they flipped their poo poo at me. Also feminism 101, and I'm telling you this sincerely under the assumption that you're posting in good faith but from a position of ignorance: when a woman, or other marginalised person, is angry and calling out problematic behaviour, the correct response is to shut up and listen. If you can't understand why they are angry, the correct response is to figure that out for yourself without questioning or invalidating their anger. This can be hard because we're socialised to do the opposite, but there is still no excuse, least of all in a space set aside for discussion of feminism. Please reflect on this, and once you have, come back and apologise to TB.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
Rakosi posted:It was a conscious decision not to get into some silly flame war by replying in kind to the sort of vitriolic responses I got; instead I tried to ignore them best as I could and replied instead to a post which was rhetorically less of a minefield in an attempt to maybe defuse this a little. Him being an apparent man did not at any point enter into my mind, but I am not convinced you would believe that. To clarify a little further, LeJackal came into a women's space, and began victim blaming, posting unspoilered accounts of sexual assault, and then arguing with and invalidating the women who called him on it. All of these were acts of violence, and TB is well within her rights to respond aggressively. That you saw her response as being more violent reflects your inner prejudices, and is something I'd also advise reflecting on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 23:24
|
|