Page 9 of 10 [ 152 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

29 Jan 2012, 2:33 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
Doing the math:

women’s average hourly wage rate is about 84%-89% of the
men’s average. Unlike other studies, controls for work history and job-related responsibilities are used.
Gender differences in full-year, full-time work experience explain a substantial proportion of the gender
wage gap — roughly 12%. Gender differences in the opportunity to supervise and to perform certain
tasks account for about 5% of the gender wage gap. Yet despite the long list of productivity related
factors, roughly one half to three-quarters of the gender wage gap cannot be explained.

So the actual difference is 11-16%. I said that discrimination likely might cause women to earn 5-10% less than men on average, than the remainder can be explained by differences in work patterns, child rearing, etc, which isn't that unreasonable given the actual total rate of pay per hour is it?

once again, you're not looking at it correctly. all of the factors you name were already accounted for before the 84 - 89% figure was calculated. you're trying to inlude the same factors twice. i can't really force you to understand the math, so i think i'll exit the debate.

also you have never really demonstrated any evidence that feminists are angry (lol). so i am exiting the debate as it is effectively pointless. many many misogynistic men make the same assertion that feminists are angry, but really they don't carry any more anger than any other group. feminists are often driven to try to change things, but that doesn't make them vengeful.


_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105


Aitrean
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 81
Location: Canada

29 Jan 2012, 4:13 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qt_0ko4njmc

Basically summarizes most of my views on this.

Aaaand
http://www.amazon.com/Why-Men-Earn-More ... 0814472109

Summarizes the rest of my views on this, I suggest you read it.

I don't buy into any feminist-made statistical data anyway. I've heard numbers as ridiculous as "Women do 90% of the work in the world, but only earn 10% of the money" (HOW DO YOU EVEN MEASURE WORK?!?!).

Personally I will never buy into feminism because it implies literally changing thought patterns. In the LAW women are more privileged than men, they don't get drafted.

However, men might be slightly more likely to get more money. HOWEVER, women are much much more likely to get less jail time (60% less by statistics!). But hey, what are we going to do? Tell judges they have to train themselves to be unbiased toward men? Tell employers to value women more when considering promotions? People can make sexist decisions if they want, is it fair? No, but still. If the laws of a society are sexist, which they aren't - that's the problem.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

29 Jan 2012, 4:45 pm

hyperlexian wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
Tequila wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
it's an article in an disreputable newpaper.


It refers to a paper by the IEA. So you'd need to track that down.

no, i don't need to do that as it isn't me making that assertion.


Here you go:
http://www.iea.org.uk/publications/rese ... lic-policy

Reading the free publication at the moment.

it's interesting because the author attempts to explain the gap, and in doing so he highlights the inequalities inherent in the current system. the author takes certain leaps and assigns figures to such variables as gender employer choices, salary negotiation tactics, the promotion of men over women, reduced hourly wages for part-time work, lack of financially viable child care options, etc. - all of which reinforce the fact that women are disadvatntaged in the work force.

so the author may believe he has explained the gender gap, but it doesn't make it excusable because it still points to an unfair inequality. thanks for linking it. did you read the articles i linked?


Disadvantaged but not discriminated against based on gender.

Men are also disadvantaged in various other areas, especially when it comes to marriage and divorce. But you don't see us crying about it much.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

29 Jan 2012, 4:45 pm

Aitrean wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qt_0ko4njmc

Basically summarizes most of my views on this.

Aaaand
http://www.amazon.com/Why-Men-Earn-More ... 0814472109

Summarizes the rest of my views on this, I suggest you read it.

I don't buy into any feminist-made statistical data anyway. I've heard numbers as ridiculous as "Women do 90% of the work in the world, but only earn 10% of the money" (HOW DO YOU EVEN MEASURE WORK?!?!).

Personally I will never buy into feminism because it implies literally changing thought patterns. In the LAW women are more privileged than men, they don't get drafted.

However, men might be slightly more likely to get more money. HOWEVER, women are much much more likely to get less jail time (60% less by statistics!). But hey, what are we going to do? Tell judges they have to train themselves to be unbiased toward men? Tell employers to value women more when considering promotions? People can make sexist decisions if they want, is it fair? No, but still. If the laws of a society are sexist, which they aren't - that's the problem.


Touche.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

29 Jan 2012, 8:31 pm

hyperlexian wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
Doing the math:

women’s average hourly wage rate is about 84%-89% of the
men’s average. Unlike other studies, controls for work history and job-related responsibilities are used.
Gender differences in full-year, full-time work experience explain a substantial proportion of the gender
wage gap — roughly 12%. Gender differences in the opportunity to supervise and to perform certain
tasks account for about 5% of the gender wage gap. Yet despite the long list of productivity related
factors, roughly one half to three-quarters of the gender wage gap cannot be explained.

So the actual difference is 11-16%. I said that discrimination likely might cause women to earn 5-10% less than men on average, than the remainder can be explained by differences in work patterns, child rearing, etc, which isn't that unreasonable given the actual total rate of pay per hour is it?

once again, you're not looking at it correctly. all of the factors you name were already accounted for before the 84 - 89% figure was calculated. you're trying to inlude the same factors twice. i can't really force you to understand the math, so i think i'll exit the debate.

also you have never really demonstrated any evidence that feminists are angry (lol). so i am exiting the debate as it is effectively pointless. many many misogynistic men make the same assertion that feminists are angry, but really they don't carry any more anger than any other group. feminists are often driven to try to change things, but that doesn't make them vengeful.


Nah what I am saying is while some of the 11-16% is probably due to discrimination, some of it is probably due to factors they overlooked, factors one can't even measure scientifically. So my estimate of 5-10% of the loss being due to discrimination is reasonable. Though it's probably at the higher end of that or maybe even slightly above 10%.

I think it's dishonest when the 30% card is pulled out. The actual 'male privilege' in work is really more like 8% or maybe at most 13%. Which is still wrong, don't get me wrong! But women have privilege in other realms, such as the criminal justice system. If Casey Anthony was a man, for example, I'm pretty sure the jury would have sentenced her to death.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

29 Jan 2012, 8:35 pm

But do women have it a little bit harder in the professional world? Absolutely. It's just not this slavery-like oppression it's made out to be.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

29 Jan 2012, 10:22 pm

donnie_darko wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
how is it "undeniable that a good deal of them have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to men"? you're drawing assumptions here that are based on absolutely nothing. perhaps you think it would be logical that they would bfeel that way because YOU would be angry if you were in their shoes, but anyone who knows feminists in real life can attest that they aren't feeling (or acting) vengeful against men.

and if you expect me to take a study seriously, you can go track it down. the onus is on you, just like the onus was on me for my evidence.


Well you sound pretty angry right now lol

a person who politely disagrees with you in an internet debate is not necessarily angry, even if she is female.

Wrt. promotions: several studies have come out recently showing that women ask for less when they ask for promotions, and that they're less likely to ask in the first place because they're perceived as harpies and treated poorly when they do - even if they deserve the promotion/raise as much as the men who ask for them. Also, men generally receive raises/promotions after they start a family 'because they have a family to support,' (as if working women aren't supporting their families), and women are put on the back-burner, regardless of whether he or she is taking time off to support the kids.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jan 2012, 1:10 am

LKL wrote:
a person who politely disagrees with you in an internet debate is not necessarily angry, even if she is female.

Wrt. promotions: several studies have come out recently showing that women ask for less when they ask for promotions, and that they're less likely to ask in the first place because they're perceived as harpies and treated poorly when they do - even if they deserve the promotion/raise as much as the men who ask for them. Also, men generally receive raises/promotions after they start a family 'because they have a family to support,' (as if working women aren't supporting their families), and women are put on the back-burner, regardless of whether he or she is taking time off to support the kids.


I'm sorry Hyperlexian, I saw anger where it wasn't there.

Yes, the promotion thing is interesting. I also think women in general (on average) are less interested in risking conflict and that could be part of why they are less likely to ask for raises/promotions as well.

I think there's also a more benign side to this as well. Men are generally expected to spend a lot of the money they earn on their woman. I mean which sex is more likely to receive a $200 necklace from their significant other? lol



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

30 Jan 2012, 1:15 am

And which one receives a $1K shop smith? :wink:

edit: that is too obtuse. My mom never received big pieces of jewelry from my dad; the presents they got each other were always functional things that would help either of them to perform their contributions to the family more easily and effectively. In that context, I can only presume that a man who gives his spouse expensive jewelry thinks that 'looking attractive and well-taken-care-of' is part of her function in the family.



Last edited by LKL on 30 Jan 2012, 1:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jan 2012, 1:16 am

LKL wrote:
And which one receives a $1K shop smith? :wink:


And who receives a $5,000 diamond ring? :D



abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

30 Jan 2012, 1:17 am

But which family traditionally pays for the wedding?


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

30 Jan 2012, 1:20 am

abacacus wrote:
But which family traditionally pays for the wedding?


The wedding is mostly meant for the woman anyways honestly.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

30 Jan 2012, 1:39 am

^actually, I think it's meant for the mother of the bride. Based on observation. 8O



Daemonic-Jackal
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 581
Location: Salford, United Kingdom

31 Jan 2012, 11:43 am

artrat wrote:
Women are looked down upon if they don't wear makeup and fashionable cloths.
Not following this gender role has prevented my from getting a job.


That's mostly looked down upon by other women, more so then men.


_________________
"Every cripple has his own way of walking. " ? Brendan Behan

http://www.facebook.com/YentonianCarlos


x_amount_of_words
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,359
Location: Spokane, Washington

31 Jan 2012, 1:52 pm

Feminism has become something that it was originally not. Many feminists today have become very hateful towards both men and women. For example, many feminists believe that housewives or stay at home moms are weak or less intelligent. They think that a women is defined by her career and how much power she has. The good thing about free countries is that we have the right to choose. Being a caring wife and loving mother is an honorable thing. I don't think I could handle it myself. But I also respect single women who take care of themselves, and working mothers/wives who can handle all three things. This area of feminism, I do not agree with.

I believe that men and women were created equally. Many people think the Bible is a result of "women hating" but the Bible says that "He created them male and female. He created them in the image of God."

Men were created primarily to be leaders and women to be helpers. The Bible says that Eve was a "suitable helpmate". This does not mean that women are secondary to men. If you look into the Hebrew of Genesis, you will see that Adam considered Eve his equal. They were to live in harmony and to keep each other company. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but it always seemed to me that Adam needed another human being to connect with. God says, "It is not good for man to be alone." This is also true today. I think men and women complement each other in their strengths and weaknesses. Men are not better than women, and women are not better than men. God created women physically weaker, but not less intelligent. I think He made Adam stronger so that he could represent the power of God. I think women show the caring side of God. (I say this because I know that women must have attributes of God because we were also created in His image. The only difference is that women were created indirectly through Adam. The Bible speaks on this but it is hard for me to explain it tactfully. It is also hard for me to discern what it all means and I can't see the big picture.) Of course, we are all unique and not everyone fits into this mold. I personally don't in some ways, but that might be the Aspie in me.

Theologically speaking, the reason men and women can't get along is because of the Fall. After the Fall, God says, "Your desire will be for your husband, but he will rule over you." God did not originally create men to be domineering over women, He meant for them to sacrificially love and lead their wife. But after The Fall, you see more men being passive, like not being the father or husband they should be, or they just control and abuse their wives. Of course, this is not true for all men! Women also have their faults. Sometimes women can be a bit overbearing and controlling as well. But this is all a result of The Fall. We were not meant to "buck heads" with each other, but to fit together in a way that only man and women can.

Similarly, the Gospel of Christ can be represented by marriage. Men should love their wives as Christ loved the Church, and women should follow that lead. Obviously women have proven that they are able to lead, but God wants it this way in marriage so that we can live in peace with each other. He chose men to lead because He created men first. And then woman from the rib of Adam. But if not for Eve's transgression, women would get the respect they deserve. And men as well. Note that Adam took most of the responsibility for The Fall. This speaks a lot into husband leadership. Many religions have put the blame primarily on Eve, but this is not correct. Though they were both held responsible for their personal actions.

That being said, I am not against women taking positions of leadership. I'm not a crazy fundamentalist who thinks women should be slaves in the house. There is just a certain order for the Church and the marriage relationship.

I only use the Bible to refer to my views because before I started reading the Bible, I had no way, other than biologically, to differentiate men and women. I think this has to do with my Asperger's and me not being a stereotypical girl.


_________________
theamazingjunkie.flavors.me


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

31 Jan 2012, 7:27 pm

x_amount_of_words wrote:
Feminism has become something that it was originally not. Many feminists today have become very hateful towards both men and women.

evidence, please?
(as for what the bible says, I couldn't care less)