Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up

The basic achievment will be to set up new councils, committees or other bodies so professional feminist and other NGO activists can milk the EU for more funds and feather theri nests. That's the reality.

The window dressing on the other hand will be fuill of pompous platitudes and high-sounding slogans designed to generate media interest and brainwash the gullible.

There are women doing all of those jobs, but not many. It may be because social condition deters many women from wanting such roles, or because it causes the people who hire for such positions to disregard some female candidates. At the same time, women are over-represented in other jobs that are hard, dirty and dangerous, but you may not be aware of it because your stereotype of what counts as hard, dirty and dangerous work is based on the male archetype. For instance, I would suggest that being an underage sex worker, trafficked to a foreign country and held against one's will is a very risky occupation, and that most people who do it are female.


Feminists believe that women are as important to society as men, that they deserve the same rights and respect; they don't believe they are the same. Basic biology determines that a fit man will have a higher proportion of muscle and lower fat reserves than an equally fit woman, which is why the genders are separated for high-level sports. But this does not mean that there are not women who are more than strong enough to do the jobs that some people want to reserve for men on the grounds that men are stronger (on average, we may be, but some, if not all women are strong enough to do the work).


Do you have any evidence for these sweeping generalisations?


There is a significant contingent within the religious right in America that teaches girls and young woman that female masturbation is immoral. And for many years the role of the clitoris and the existence of the female orgasm have been ignored or repressed by the medical professional and educators. Against that background, I think it's a good thing that feminists are teaching female students about their sexuality and encouraging them to celebrate it, rather than being ashamed.

As a man, I'm guessing a straight one, you would surely prefer women to be confident about their sexuality and aware of how to enjoy their bodies.


If this happens, then you will surely support what I wrote in this thread, which is that Polish women should be encouraged to get involved to ensure that the group is representative of the views of the majority. I suspect that most Polish women support the right to abortion but that views on the left-right debate and the Church are mixed.

I would suggest that is an example which in no way shape or form really addresses the point which was made earlier.
If you want to take the conversation that route then you'll find "choice" is entirely absent in your pretentious and self-righteous response. His point is that women frequently don't choose dirty and dangerous jobs. If you don't know what those are then you likely have little to no experience with the kind of jobs he meant.

Ever been an A&E nurse or a care worker in a challenging behaviour unit?

Mind you, a lot of the jobs that our misogynistic friend probably meant have traditionally been denied to women.

That is hardly an occupation. That is the victim of criminal activity.

Polonius' choice of words for the title of this thread; "Professional feminists".. whom, exactly does he mean?

OK, then a woman over the age of consent who chooses to become a sex worker. The principle is the same: women DO occupy dangerous, unhealthy jobs, it's just that those jobs don't all fit the (male) mental image you have of them.

Cabin crew on an airline would be another example. They could save your life one day, and could lose theirs in an accident. It is probably no less risky than the (largely male) career of fire fighter, but because they wear makeup and tight skirts, we don't think of them in the same way.

If men could prostitute themselves for the money women can then you'd have A LOT of male prostitutes. It's not that men don't choose that profession, it's that the demand isn't there.


So you think the average commercial passenger flight is no safer than a fire which requires firefighters?

I agree there's less demand for male than female prostitutes. However, this is irrelevant to the point I was making, which was that women do dangerous/unhealthy jobs, but we don't give them credit for that because our mental image of such a career is a male one.


Again, you're twisting my logic. Of course the average flight is less risky than a fire that requires firefighters. But this is irrelevant to my point, because firefighters spend very little of their time fighting fires. Mostly they sit in their staff rooms, polish fire engines, attend car accidents, rescue cats from trees etc. Very, very occasionally they go into situations where there's a fire, and in only a tiny percentage of those are they in the kind of inferno-type situation where their lives are at risk.

My original comment suggested that, over time, a pretty young Polish woman working as cabin crew for LOT or Ryanair is as likely to have to save someone's life as is a firefighter, and that she is also as likely to find herself in a situation that puts her own life at risk.

They can, they do and there are.

Your logic never needed any twisting. I merely held up a mirror for you to behold.


Your point doesn't actually support what you've just written.
Most men don't give prostitutes the credit they deserve because we've no experience with them. That and if we could, a lot of men would do this job.

The fact of the matter is most western women do not actively seek out jobs in which not keeping your head on a swivel in your daily routine will get you:

- blinded
- suffocated
- burnt alive
- burnt badly
- minus one or more appendages
- hard of hearing in 15 years or more
- electrocuted
- shocked
- dec apitated
- poisoned
- mulched
- ground up
- falling to the ground about to receive impact trauma

I hope no one's saying women don't do dangerous jobs. That being said, the Western woman is quite often a sheltered creature with little concept of what dirty and dangerous work really is. Why is anyone pretending otherwise?

@Foreigner4, you are of course right that most Western women don't choose or do jobs that possess the characteristics you listed. But then, nor do most Western men. A combination of mechanisation and globalisation mean both genders increasingly do knowledge-based work in the service sector.

But where jobs exist that exhibit the dangers you described, I would argue they are done by men and women in broadly similar numbers. Food manufacturing and agriculture are two industries in which there are a lot of industrial accidents. A great many women work in these environments. And, here in the UK, a high proportion of them are Polish.

@Foreigner4

Buddy, do you really know any man 'actively seeking' out jobs where he could get poisoned or decapitated? I'm afraid most of the men that do risky jobs didn't really have the choice. If they could decide, they'd make more money and be safe.

Yeah dude, it's pretty f-in easy on a farm or working on an oil rig or in a metal fabrication shop or with heavy machinery or hydraulics in general. There are tons of jobs in which a guy's head could easily be sheared off his neck with a little complacency on the job.

Lots of guys choose to do that kind of work and lots don't.
Don't kid yourself that everyone wants a cushy job a lot of people find value in physically demanding jobs.

I agree. And you may find more men than women, because men are usually more 'physical' than women. Even tho I remember having a (female) neighbour who was working in a hospital, often during the night, and then would get home to take care of her 4-5 kids. That seemed pretty physical to me. Well, she was the kind of person who couldn't just sit and do nothing.

The point here is that there's no reason for men and women to not have the same rights. And that goes for work too.

Many women in need of a job take cashier jobs in supermarkets for instance. Of course, they don't risk poisoning or quartering, but they often can get badly insulted, threatened, and even physically attacked. It's probably not as 'bad' as getting your limbs chopped, but do we need to compare the degrees of risk? Risks are risks.

An injection of common sense is always welcome

Thank you

Only 50-50 occupational parity will do including unification of Olympic and other sporting events.
Inspectors should levy hefty fines against any employer not resepecting 50-50 parity in hiring practices. If a man his wife and their son are operating a small shop, they will have to take on a female worker to achieve pasrity. Whether they do enough business for that to pay -- well that's their problem. Equaltiy must prevail. Parity is supreme!

What is wrong with paying people the same for the same job or allowing the same opportunity for advancement?

Nothing wrong at all. But why stop at half-measures? To paraphrase Rokita: PARITY O MUERTE!

Its not a half measure its equality and you agree unless you contradict yourself in one line.

So if women are generally not as physically strong, they don't deserve the same treatment?
This is not about 50/50 everywhere (it's actually more 100%/100%), but receiving the same treatment, regardless of your gender. Is that still too silly for you?

If this is the Christian morality you guys brag about, I won't agree with it.

They can't have it both ways -- full parity where profitable and prestigious seats in parliament, cabinet posts, managerial positions in commerce and industry, the media and academia are concerned, but let them share the less attractive jobs as well. You can't have your cake and eat it.

If they are competent, why not? It's just that still today, men are often prefered for these positions, over women with the same competences, skills, and experience. Men still look more 'serious' and maybe 'reliable' than women. It's a silent discrimination tho, hard to prove. But it's still there.

But let's make it clear: I'm not a pro-affirmative action (positive discrimination) either. Skills and experience should prevail, over gender, skin colour, religion, or whatever.


Are you saying women usually don't have ****** jobs? Cuz that's true...in no way.

I'm glad that you support the removal of traditional gender rolls it's a step forward.

Either traditonal roles or parity.

Traditional roles being?

You are going to have to expand on that cos its so obscure it could mean anything

Polonius, what is a professional feminist?

To be completely blunt, you seem like the sort of chap who would argue a great many thing with no practical experience. I presume this to be one of them.

Adieu.


You are probably correct.


You have my complete agreement here. That being said, it is time for some of these career feminists to look at men's roles in the work force with the same level of objectivity

they are "encouraging" men to do for women.


This isn't the thread for it but I couldn't agree less.

well I did wonder that myself.
perhaps he means 'professional person (eg doctor, lawyer etc) who is a feminist?
or someone who earns their living from being a feminist?
surely there are not so many of those.
not even sure what this thread it about tbh.