Your favorite movie


S

sharon rutman

Guest
Thanks you gentlemen for explaining this all to me, an unenlightened female. I ought to be grateful that women have advanced from not being able to vote in 1912 to a lofty position of studying the shocking revelation that there's--(drumroll)--some rust on the Titanic. Well, somebody's got to do it! Do they give out Nobel Prizes for this or what?
 
S

sharon rutman

Guest
Well, what can I say, science was never my favorite subject. Now I can see why.
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,114
17
298
>Thanks you gentlemen for explaining this all to me, an unenlightened female

Sharon, don't play the gender victim. I realise that is like asking the ocean to ignore the lunar pull, but please just stop. It is not a credit to women in general, and it makes you, in particular, look callow. "Unenlightened female" as the violins swell to a crescendo on the sound track. At no point has anyone refered to you as unenlightened, so don't assume the mantle of victimhood.

And, how rude of you to either ignore Inger or consign her to the role of "gentleman." But, "Thank you board members" would strip your posting of much of its bathos, wouldn't it!

>I ought to be grateful that women have advanced from not being able to vote in 1912 to a lofty position of studying the shocking revelation that there's--(drumroll)--some rust on the Titanic.

Yes, you should be but, no, you wont be. You remind me of a ten year old sitting in Introduction To Science and whining "Why do I have to know this? I'll never use it!" In the case of a ten year old it is semi-understandable (and easily rebutted with "You aren't old enough to judge what you will or will not need to know") but in the case of an adult the "Mediocre-And-Proud-Of-It" mentality is embarrassing and gets tiresome fast. If you do not see WHY you should be glad, then you really need to expand your mentality beyond that of a fifth grader. But, you won't.

Since Martin quoted George Harrison, I'd like to bow out with a quote from The Smiths that you mightlike to ponder:

"If you're wondering why the love that you long for eludes you/ and people are "rude" and "cruel" to you/ I'll tell you why/ but you wouldn't believe me. You just haven't earned it yet, baby."
 

Jim Hathaway

Member
Dec 18, 2004
311
0
111
>>One token female scientist studying rust just doesn't cut it.<<
I have a hard time containing my anger at a statement like this, I was not aware we were holding an affirmative action class , I thought the purpose of these experts was to provide expertise we do not already have.
I will give you a name,- Emiko Ohkuni Tierney- she may not mean very much to you, but in the field that occupies a large amount of my study time, she provides an aspect with her viewpoint, drawing on her education and work in sociology which I find very valuable.
She has written two books which I doubt you have read which I value very highly.
I will give you another name, Inger Shell, who has written a huge amount of posts on this website.
aside from being a good person, (I have on occasion exchanged emails with her) I respect her very highly for not only her expertise, but her dedication in working her way to the top in a very small community. I despise seeing the achievements of someone like her belittled.
I do not have a higher degree, if I did, it would increase my knowledge in one or two areas, but I still rely on people who do know and whose opinions I value- sex is not a part of it, and the only time it enters into it is when an argument like this is brought up.
I do not, and have never considered sex to predetermine expertise in a given area-
If you do not like a female scientist leaning over a microscope giving an educated opinion which you can either choose to accept or discard, what would you have in it's place.
TV has such great potential to give someone a front seat in an investigation like this, but instead what we get %90 of the time is WWF, or Madonna going down on the Titanic.
Everyone has their own field, mine has become Japanese history, and the Bakumatsu and Edo period, through to the Meiji restoration. period,
Many people, I realize find that tedious, and a boring subject,That is their choice, but if you open a book on that subject, don't be suprised if you are faced with a lot of information on the subject. Also not unlike Titanic there is a community of people, both men and women who study it, and if you want to learn, have informed opinions.
If you are not interest in it, there is always Survivor or American Idol.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,643
462
453
Easley South Carolina
>>Well, what can I say, science was never my favorite subject. Now I can see why.<<

Which is hardly our problem. If you don't like science, that's fine, but don't heap scorn and redicule on those who do, especially if they happen to be women who are very accomplished in their fields. All you do with that approach is shoot yourself in the foot.
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
38
308
quote:

And, how rude of you to either ignore Inger or consign her to the role of "gentleman." But, "Thank you board members" would strip your posting of much of its bathos, wouldn't it!
Shhhhhh! Guys, I'm gearing up to claim victim status! I'm just deciding on which particular angle to pursue - whether to argue that Sharon's discourse represents the latest attempt by the third wave feminists to perpetuate the dominant patriarchal paradigm and a fundamental betrayal of the priciples that women have fought for, or to explore the clear evidence that her position on rusticle research represents an affront to ecofemnists everywhere (who know that any *true* feminist would recognise that the study of rusticles is really a metaphor for the erosion of the dominant phallicism of the ship itself).

Seriously Sharon - I find it astonishing that on one hand you can be lamenting glass ceilings, and yet in the very same thread be critising 'snotty scientists' and dismissing the work of an eminent female researcher because you don't happen to fancy her field of study. The irony registers off the scale!​
 
Apr 30, 2007
64
0
86
Sharon

Wow! You’re one feisty nettle of a woman. I suspect had Lightoller helped you into a lifeboat he would have been clouted around the head with an oar!!

What you have to take on board is the need to add balance to your posts. As a good example of what I mean, two contributors who I always find worth reading are Michael S and Inger S. Michael’s wisdom and Inger’s knowledgeable comments are almost always backed up with some reasoning and balance. And if I post a comment I always try and adopt those principles.

Remember that there is no right or wrong answers to most topics and totally one sided angry opinions can be a real turn off.
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,114
17
298
>I'm gearing up to claim victim status! I'm just deciding on which particular angle to pursue

Inger- dare to be great. Aim big. Pursue both angles and demonstrate that the 21st Century Woman can be a multifaceted victim rather than the old one dimensional model with which we are all familiar.
happy.gif


Something odd to ponder is that for all the shrillness, strident bickering, and posturing that took place in the US in the 1990s, what emerged large scale was NOT a perception of The Sisterhood is Powerful (a good book, BTW) or Woman as Goddess, or even Woman the Fighter. What was spawned, apparently, was a fascination with Woman the Bimbo, at least here in the US. Susan Faludi and Naomi Wolf had their 15 minutes and, suddenly, came the tidal wave of Paris and Nicole, and Anna Nicole, and Jenna, and Jessica, and Lindsay, and Britney, and their lesser sisters who hit, and held, a level of public attention that seems frightening- and depressing. One could reflexively "blame the media" only, of course, the media would not push them if they did not sell papers and give ratings points. Backlash against the 1990s mindset, perhaps?

BTW- When the less-than-a-talking-chimp in the White House kisses Condoleeza Rice on ceremonial occasions, do you not wish she'd smack him? I do. It is demeaning to her, both as an authority figure and as a woman.
 
May 3, 2002
799
24
173
58
Wellington, New Zealand
In my country the Prime Minister is a woman as are some of her top ministers

....now let's talk about glass ceilings.

Hey Inger, glad to see you are making good humour of all this. Best wishes from across the Tasman.

Martin
 
Feb 8, 2007
63
1
86
Jeez. I just went back and read a bit of the archives, looking for Sharon's original post. I'm afraid, Jim, that your tirade against Brittany et. al., will probably be lost on her. I imagine she doesn't miss a single bit of news about any of them.

Speaking as a woman (full disclosure - I have a B.S. in geology, so maybe my female-ness is suspect - but, hey, I also have 5 kids) I have to point out that all women are not all of a kind. I like the technical stuff. Sharon hates it. We're different people.

My only question is, if she hates it so much, why is she bothering to read an article or watch a show about the technical aspects of Titanic? Stick to the social stuff if that's where your interest lies and don't yell at the rest of us for studying how microbiology has affected a ship at the bottom of the ocean for nearly a hundred years.

So, kudos to all those scientists (especially the women) who get to do this fun stuff and broaden our knowledge. Oh and keep pushing the glass ceiling higher and higher...

Marlene
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
38
308
Marlene, a pleasure to see you here! I'm the odd one out in my family with my Arts bias - my brother has a physics and engineering degree, and my sister is most of the way through her BS in zoology (she's working it around raising three kids aged five and under). You're absolutely right that women - like men - have a range of interests. I look forward to seeing more of your thoughts here on ET.

Martin, I've just learned that the new Director of the Auckland War Memorial Museum is a woman; Dr Vanda Vitali.

quote:

Pursue both angles and demonstrate that the 21st Century Woman can be a multifaceted victim rather than the old one dimensional model with which we are all familiar.
Jim, is it too greedy to claim to be a victim of both Sharon's third wave watered down cultural feminism (women don't like science! They find the pro-science bias alienating!) and of her hardline second wave radical feminist edge (men are our oppressors! We need our own forum so they cannot subvert our narratives!)? There's not too much consistancy ideologically between the two positions, so I figure a split approach would enable me to cover all bases.

Sadly, yes - by the late 90s/early 2000s we saw that slapper attire and poles were actually statements of liberation! Gurl-power and all that.

All just history repeating - the reaction of the second wave feminists was remiscent of the first wave feminists to the flappers that emerged following the introduction of the 19th Amendment. "Is this what we fought for?" they bemoaned. "So women can wear lipstick?"​
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,114
17
298
>Jim, is it too greedy to claim to be a victim

Go for it! The Victimhood is Powerful! I support you 100%. Although I DO realize that you do not need male validation in any way, shape, or form and so offer a warm and fuzzy nebulous support of the sort you'd get from an octogenarian great-uncle.

>Sadly, yes - by the late 90s/early 2000s we saw that slapper attire and poles were actually statements of liberation! Gurl-power and all that.

Odd, isn't it! That after what some called 'indoctrination' at grade school level, the 1990s generation shied away from the Alan Alda/ Gloria Steinem template, and instead adapted the persona of urban thugs and " ho's " on a large scale. What was drilled into these kids was the predictable drivel, and they rejected it to an amazing extent. Which was both good and bad. I think if "Herstory" had caught on, it might have driven me to projectile vomiting long ere this....and, likewise, group hugs, group cries, "Summoning the Power," deconstruction, all seem about as dated as a shout of "Vo-Vo-de-Oh-Do!" between the verse and chorus of a song. But, it is jarring to hear words like "b----" "ho" "street c---" and "nigga" coming out of the mouths of those who were once taught that "women" as a word is offensive to "wymmyn."

As the thug 'n' ho thing began to play out, we suddenly saw the rise of The Sexy Idiot. The fact that a magazine recently posed the question "Is a Bustiere EVER Appropriate Office Wear?" made me wonder if...perhaps...the No Makeup, and Birkenstocks look of ten years ago wasn't psychologically better for those who sported it.

At the track where I do my "Daily 8" (miles, not laps) there is a large group of people in their early 20s who get together three or four times a week to play soccer. What I find encouraging- and also interesting- is that the teams are gender integrated, and the games are played full-out and not 'We have to hold back because we're playing with girls.' So, some good came out of the morass that was the educational system, and popular culture, they passed through. Pleasant to see. But then, we have the spectre of the President kissing she-who-arguably-holds-the-most-power-of-any-woman-currently-living on Ceremonial occasions, and with that comes the realisation that there is still a way to go.
 
Feb 8, 2007
63
1
86
"But then, we have the spectre of the President kissing she-who-arguably-holds-the-most-power-of-any-woman-currently-living on Ceremonial occasions, and with that comes the realisation that there is still a way to go."

Well, ya know, Jim- you gotta consider the source...

"the teams are gender integrated, and the games are played full-out and not 'We have to hold back because we're playing with girls.'"

With two daughters who've just graduated from college, I have to point out that this is how kids function these days. My daughters had friends of both genders all through college - they all lived together, played together, worked together. Sometimes sex was involved and when it was, each person took responsibility for it; my daughters report the guys were willing to use condoms, and the girls always took their birth control. And it was ALWAYS consensual and usually only once they were "involved" with someone.

Now, we're talking about people with goals and interests and intelligence, which may set them apart from others of their generation. I don't know that any of my kids read ALL ABOUT Paris or Brittany, et. al., but they probably read some of it. Still, these kids, men and women both, live free, in control, and close to other people. And they don't worry about gender differences.

Which is its' own sort of accolade.
 

Mindy Deckard

Member
Aug 29, 2005
123
0
111
Oh dear, I came in a bit late here! Although this is quite an intriguing little discussion I just wanted to quickly put in my vote for my favorite Titanic movie.

I personally loved watching all of the Titanic movies (well, not Britannic with Bisset but really, who liked that one and its wonderful CGI?...Really, now?)

My personal favorite is unorthodox however. I loved watching the German propaganda film Titanic. It was so wrong, yet, for some reason, it is the movie that I have endorsed time and time again for the film and the history classes that I have taken.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,643
462
453
Easley South Carolina
>>but, hey, I also have 5 kids<<

Uh oh! With "The Sisterhood" that's a capital offence!

Personally, I find that along with your degree is something that the very founders of the feminist movement would have been thrilled to see.

Why?

Well, when you get down to it, it's that freedom to choose, to set the direction of, and have control over your life, that the whole movement was quintessentially all about. You don't have to have everything if you don't want it, but what matters is that you can. It wasn't forced down your throat.
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
38
308
quote:

Uh oh! With "The Sisterhood" that's a capital offence!
Erm...not quite, Mike. Depends on how you're defining "sisterhood". I'm a card carrying feminist (as is my sister with the kiddies), and I certainly don't believe that having children is a capital offense.

I agree with you on choice, however. That's Feminism 101 to me - freedom of choice. Although then we get bogged down in all sorts of socio-economic arguments about how truly 'free' we are to choose...​
 
May 3, 2002
799
24
173
58
Wellington, New Zealand
I find it ironic if not tragic that Kate Millet ended up distitute selling christmas trees while some of her successors got fat on the gravy train.

Inger, I hear you about the freedom of choice arguement.

Mindy, welcome to the debate. feel free to join in. I liked Titanic and ANTR and the long version of GoTA.

Martin

"Hey all the girls look the same
Don't they know just what their mothers
Paid in blood, and tears to change."
-George Michael in "John And Elvis Are Dead"
 

Similar threads