For the female EMS'ers out there

[WolfmanHarris]

I'd argue that semantics are a smokescreen that people hide behind rather than address the issues at their core. Intent is paramount.

[hammerpcp]

Are we denying that prejudice exists? And if not then why are we trying to discredit any example of it occurring?

[WolfmanHarris]

Hardly. I'm denying that any meaningful discourse is generated by prefacing the debate first with a list of approved and not approved operational definitions. Rather those debating should accept, that while the semantics may vary if there is no intent to offend and if the language is not obviously inflammatory (as per, let's say in this case, a reasonable persons test). Further I'm denying that any reasonable understanding or progress can be reached when the debate becomes immediately exclusionary and focus on fault and on punitive language. This is neither progressive, nor impowering to those seeking redress as the stigma of victimization continues internally. I don't seek to invalidate your point of view, only your perceived privilege to exclude mine.

[spenac]

You should heed my advice. Semantics are paramount.

Aint no dame gonna tell me nuthin. :twisted:

Actually I see no problem with calling a female-female. Perhaps saying girl could seem I'm questioning there age, but again being way to sensitive.

Honestly at work I usually just say the other medic, I don't sex them. If they're that hard to figure out as to male/female not my problem.

[Eydawn]

Are we talking about semantics, or semiotics here? If you're going to argue that the entire language system and the way it has been constructed with signifier/signified is inherently discriminatory towards women, we're going to have a LONG thread. That's a really complex issue.

Yes, language imparts meaning. But some of that meaning comes from the interpretation by the recipient- not the original intent of the use by the person communicating.

If folks want me to cut this off here, speak now. Otherwise, I'm going to go along on a loooong exploration of language theory, feminism, and cultural interpretations of gender roles. I'm full of this stuff from my latest classes.

Wendy

CO EMT-B

[WolfmanHarris]

Go for it! Could be interesting.

[hammerpcp]

Wendy, although you are obviously very intelligent as well as educated I am getting a headache anticipating what is to come. I believe that like beauty, much of perception is in the eye of the beholder, but not all. I am not being a smartass or inflammatory, I really want to know if you deny that sexism (since that is the prejudice at hand) exists?

I don't believe that men have no right to an opinion on this topic. I just don't put any merit in it until proven otherwise by the individual. For example, I would be interested in hearing what Michael had to say, and maybe Dust if he's taken his meds. Lone star and sirduke on the other hand can keep their opinions to themselves :twisted:

This isn't because men are inherently morons, but rather because, like describing for someone who has never seen the colour murple, someone who has not had a certain experience can't possibly have an accurate impression of the reality.

[WolfmanHarris]

Do you not see the potential problem in an entirely insular debate? If all the input comes from a single perspective, how much understanding can be obtained?

For example, if I have a problem at work I can go to the rest of the co-workers for commiseration and hear their opinions, which will likely parallel my own or I can go home talk to my friends who don't work with me and get some actual input from outside the situation.

I have no problem (how could I) with banding together for mutual support. But if its a debate on the issue, failure to consider different perspectives is a losing proposition from the get go.

That being said, I don't necessarily expect us to agree on this point, nor do we need to. As a forum, any and all who wish to add their two cents will (and then some). So let's move past the debate over whether or not any of us should offer our input into this thread, accept that it will happen regardless and discuss the OP's original point.

- Matt

[Dustdevil]

Excellent observation by Mateo. I can assure you that any man in nursing is more than qualified to speak on this topic. You do not know sexual harassment until you have spent a year as a male in nursing.

Are we denying that prejudice exists? And if not then why are we trying to discredit any example of it occurring?

Absolutely not. But that is not what I understood this topic to be about. It was not about prejudice. It was about sexist treatment in the professional arena, with very specific examples given. It certainly happens. But to assume that every perceived mistreatment you might suffer in the workplace is sexist victimisation that you have no control over is a self-perpetuating victim mentality. In my experience, the woman is capable of controlling the situation, should she choose to do so.

Now, prejudice and sexist treatment of a non-professional nature, such as the bench dancing incident you related, are a completely different situation from that which this topic was raised to discuss. They are certainly no less valid or important. And I don't think that anyone can honestly deny that they occur much too often in society at large, including in EMS. But I maintain that even a diminutive woman is quite capable of commanding the professional respect of her co-workers. But first, she has to respect herself.

[Neesie]

I am one of 4 females that work at a service with 16 men. I have never had any problems with any of them saying they have problems with working with women. However, with that said, I have somewhat of an issue with working with women. Not all women, just a couple of the ones we have at the service.

Now supposing that the men aren't lying, they have told me they like to work with me. I have never had difficulty lifting anyone on the stretcher, etc. except the ones they have problems with. But the typical up to 300 pound patient, I can lift.