[Swizec]

I will probably get shunned to death for asking this, but I must ask.

The described behaviour of men in the article is pretty damn sexist, true. But how is it any different from how men in groups behave towards one another? Just replace all the sexist jokes with gay jokes or sissy jokes or just about any other type of jokes men direct at one another to establish pecking orders within groups.

Reading this, it doesn't feel so much like the terrible sexism it's portrayed as, but more like reading about a clash of cultures. This is how groups of men organise themselves. I understand it's jarring for women and that women do it differently, but still, all I see here are men treating a woman exactly like they treat other men.

By the sound of it, she's actually being accepted into the group. Hazing is always the first step.

[onemorepassword]

> Just replace all the sexist jokes with gay jokes or sissy jokes or just about any other type of jokes men direct at one another to establish pecking orders within groups.

You may want to consider hanging out with a different crowd...

Also, this is not "hanging out", this is the workplace. Different standards should apply. Bullying and intimidation in the workplace is unacceptable for any reason, and in this case it's both bullying and sexism.

Yes, I know this is how certain groups of men behave. It also happens to be the same men who's jobs are in danger of permanently disappearing, and this is exactly one of the main reasons nobody gives a shit.

[jiggy2011]

By the sounds of the article this is British construction workers we are talking about. They have their own culture which is equally as strange as ours, they literally rip on each other all of the time.

They must find something to tease you about, whether it's being "gay" , your nationality or just the football team you follow.

Unfortunately in this case in the absence of anything else they chose to pick up on her being a woman.

[gertertsgsdfa]

That's not really much of a defence though, is it? British construction workers have decided for themselves which jokes are normal, which are funny, which jokes cross the line. Their tastes are biased in a very sexist way (probably more to do with subjective bias than actual misogyny, but still sexist in content).

Think about your list of things to joke about. If you're not a straight, masculine, white, English man then they joke about whatever makes you different. Which means sexist, homophobic or racist jokes. If you are a straight, masculine, white, English man, then, ha, ha, you like Manchester United. It's not ha, ha, your mum's got cancer, or ha, ha, you lost your wife in a car accident. No, hurtful jokes only get made to people who are different. People who are like the majority get made fun off for having different taste with regards being a sports fan.

Just because it's a tradition, and they don't mean it, doesn't mean it's okay.

[jiggy2011]

They'd probably call you gay even if you weren't, whether or not you actually are is probably not that important to them.

You'd also probably get made fun of more for being say Irish or Scottish than for being black.

Whether or not it's "okay" it is not something you could reasonably expect to be changed for one person.

I would think that really her employer should have managed her expectations better.

[arrrg]

Using "gay" as an insult is very problematic and homophobic.

Calling someone who is gay "gay" is generally not a problem. (Depending on context it obviously can be, but that's then more dependent on the context, not the word.)

The implication of calling someone who isn't "gay" is that being gay is somehow bad or something to be offended about. That is as clear a homophobic statement as there can be.

It is homophobic, by the way, even if the intent of the speaker isn't there.

[jiggy2011]

Perhaps, but construction workers tend not to spend much time considering the implications of language in the way that people who are college educated might. So what you have is more a clash of the cultures than real homophobia.

The way I've always thought of the word "gay" being used in that way was not so much that it was bad to be gay (as in the sexuality) so much, but that you are associating the person with certain stereotypical gay traits such as effeminacy which would be somewhat insulting to a stereotypical macho construction worker.

[coldtea]

>You may want to consider hanging out with a different crowd...

And you may want to consider actually being more truthful about what you and your pals do do when you hang around.

(Not to mention the irony of 5 lines below, in your same comment, using language like "gives a shit").

>Also, this is not "hanging out", this is the workplace. Different standards should apply.

Only for puritan cultures, that hold a clear distinction between work and normal life/play.

>Yes, I know this is how certain groups of men behave. It also happens to be the same men who's jobs are in danger of permanently disappearing, and this is exactly one of the main reasons nobody gives a shit.

This sounds like a reason to actually "give a shit".

Not sure how you justify yourself, morally, to care (or pretend to care) about "sexism" and "male jokes" while at the same time "not giving a shit" about people being forced into unemployment.

[onemorepassword]

I don't give a shit about sexist and homophobic neanderthals who need to put down, intimidate and bully other people to make themselves feel better.

And no, I truthfully don't hang out with such scum.

You seem to have a very twisted idea of what normal, civilized male behavior is.

[coldtea]

>You seem to have a very twisted idea of what normal, civilized male behavior is.

Yes, it's "not giving a shit" about people forced into unemployment, and calling other people "scum" and "neanderthals" (after an extinct race of people -- might as well go full on and use the other n... word).

Swearing, holier-than-thou, casually racist remarks for whole classes of people (as if construction workers described in the article are "sexist and homophobic neanderthals" for making some comments between them in jest as 99.9% of the male population does, and one should "not give a shit" about them).

Way to prove your superior, non-sexist, caring and sensitive "civilized male behavior".

[gertertsgsdfa]

Well, it's not exactly the same, is it? Firstly, when straight men make gay jokes at each other, everyone knows it isn't true, it's just a joke. Straight sexual jokes are more likely to have a component of truth to them, which makes them must less pleasant to receive. Jokes between men are part of how men establish pecking orders, but sexual jokes are part of how men signal their attraction to women. Unwanted sexual advances feel unpleasantly intrusive. They're supposed to feel that way. It's a part of human sexuality - we're all strongly motivated to push for our own sexual autonomy.

Secondly, there's the fact that these jokes single her out. She's the only one getting sexual and sexist jokes, so that makes her a special target. If it were all those men making constant gay and sissy jokes to a gay man, you wouldn't think twice about calling it bullying. Hazing becomes bullying if one person gets singled out.

Bullying with a sexual component is straight up sexual harassment. Maybe it isn't meant that way, but that's exactly what it is. A lot of bullying exists because dumb people don't think about what they are doing. "It's just a joke," they say. But it's not. It's the same joke, every day, from everyone. This is exactly the kind of situation where an employer has to step in and tell everyone to grow up and leave it at home. And when I say they have to, I mean it's the law, and they're going to get sued.

Also, the less direct sexism the writer faces show that she is not being treated like the men. The assumption that she is lost or trespassing because she is a lone woman on a building site is pretty sexist. Sure, women working on building sites are rare, but so are women getting lost on building sites. The whole asking if she was "fit" e-mail conversation was cringe inducing - and completely not how a man would be treated.

[JonnieCache]

>But how is it any different than how men in groups behave towards one another?

Men do not typically fear sexual violence from each other.

Not that the men on that site were necessarily going to rape the engineer, but it was certainly orders of magnitude more likely than them raping each other.

For the record I understand your point and you might be right, she may well be being accepted, but I don't think it's really reasonable that she should just feel OK with it.

EDIT: and tbh in an ideal world men wouldn't have to face "hazing" (bullying) either. It's a pretty poor justification for women having to cope with a worse variant.

[Swizec]

> Men do not typically fear sexual violence from each other.

Women do not typically fear sexual violence from men either. Any woman I've ever asked "Do you really live in constant fear from rape as the internet activists suggest" has answered with "Not really, unless I'm going down a dark alley alone at night it doesn't really cross my mind"

But y'know, going down a dark alley alone at night, I'm pretty damn on guard myself and I'm a guy.

For the record: I have always felt americans (and anglosaxons in general) are orders of magnitude more afraid of the world than any other people I've ever spoken to. Men and women alike.

EDIT TO YOUR EDIT: > EDIT: and tbh in an ideal world men wouldn't have to face "hazing" (bullying) either. It's a pretty poor justification for women having to cope with a worse variant.

Ideal or not, hazing and bullying has worked for countless millennia to distinguish those you can rely on in a tight spot from those you cannot. The more dangerous the circumstances, the harder becoming accepted by a group seems to be. It's just how humans are.

[seanmcdirmid]

> For the record: I have always felt americans (and anglosaxons in general) are orders of magnitude more afraid of the world than any other people I've ever spoken to. Men and women alike.

You should qualify that by where you live. There are dangerous places and there are safer places. America is a bit more dangerous in many places than Europe.

I wouldn't let my wife walk alone at any time in India these days but I have no problem with her walking alone in Beijing in the middle of the night.

The world is vast.

[arethuza]

"America is a bit more dangerous in many places than Europe."

I'd be surprised if the most violent places and times in the US were really that different to the most violent places and times in Europe. However, what I suspect is different is where and when violence is likely to occur.

[JonnieCache]

>Ideal or not, hazing and bullying has worked for countless millennia to distinguish those you can rely on in a tight spot from those you cannot. The more dangerous the circumstances, the harder becoming accepted by a group seems to be. It's just how humans are.

You're an intelligent guy, surely you realise that this can be used to justify any number of barbaric, animalistic behaviours. I could make up a list of lurid things society should let me do to you and your family by this logic, but like I said, you seem clever enough to imagine them yourself.

As far as I'm concerned this kind of dawkins-style biological reductionism represents the abandonment of enlightenment thinking and I will not stand for it. I am not an ape, and neither are you.

[1123581321]

The Enlightenment era was arguably a high point of group-joining rituals.

[Swizec]

I know I know, bullying is not okay and I agree. But the fact of the matter is we as humans want people to "pay their dues". We are always going to find a way of ensuring that happens.

[jiggy2011]

One thing I do notice is that the sort of places that participate in more "Hazing" type behavior do often have a keener sense of loyalty and justice, perhaps because there is a stronger bond between people.

Rather than the typical corporate america style "rat race" where everyone is very polite but happy to stab each other in the back for their own aims.

[tallanvor]

Having been in a fraternity, I have unfortunately been through hazing processes on both sides. Although it was very light hazing, I'm still ashamed both of having allowed myself to be put through it as well as to have put others through it.

The people who are responsible for hazing? --The ones that go at it with the most gusto? I've learned that those are the ones you should trust the least.

There is absolutely nothing respectable about hazing.

[cafard]

"For the record: I have always felt americans (and anglosaxons in general) are orders of magnitude more afraid of the world than any other people I've ever spoken to. Men and women alike."

Would it be fair to rephrase this as "Americans and citizens of the UK and its former dominions have an expectation of public order that many other people do not, and are troubled when the expectation is not met."?

For the record, I (an American) have been held up at gunpoint. It did not keep me from being out and about late at night, though it made me more aware of what was around me. What should I have done to reduce my fear by an order of magnitude?

[carlob]

> Ideal or not, hazing and bullying has worked for countless millennia to distinguish those you can rely on in a tight spot from those you cannot.

So has being in constant danger of being eaten by a large carnivore, why don't you submit yourself to that then?

[tome]

I don't know what sort of places you've worked, but I've never experienced "hazing" at any of my jobs.

[UnoriginalGuy]

And how many blue collar jobs is that?

[kmfrk]

    Just replace all the sexist jokes with gay jokes or sissy 
    jokes

"Just replace the sexism with homophobia! Boys will be boys!"

What kind of fucking zoo do you work at?

[angersock]

One populated by normal, functioning human beings, I wager?

In blue-collar workplaces constant ribbing and bullshitting is usually a way of keeping low stress and friendly.

To the rest of us, consider it a form of play.

[arrrg]

Sissy jokes are also sexist, by the way. It's a great example of how sexism can affect both men and women equally. Sissy jokes are gender policing. The implication is that being a man and being feminine is incompatible. They exclude feminine men.

All the jokes and insults you listed are extremely problematic and most certainly also deserve our attention (though that is most certainly not a valid criticism of this article, no single article has the obligation to mention every problem).

[Botono]

I don't know of any group of men in a workplace that would sing songs at random men passing by, or see a man dressed for a particular job role and ask them what they are doing there all by themselves. She was obviously treated differently than they would treat each other.

[mdpye]

all I see here are men treating a woman exactly like they treat other men.

I think you mean "men physically smaller than themselves". This is how morons, not men, organise themselves.

[rimantas]

I doubt he does mean that. It's not related to the size at all.