Discussion in 'Debate Room' started by Jack Asher, Feb 7, 2015.
I heard you guys don't have dem boobs no more on page 3...
I honestly don't know to be honest. I've heard it's back. Might check this out.
I always thought that was pretty special. Sure, might be sexist, but I like details like that in different cultures that show they aren't freaking out over a little bit of nudity.
That fits in the category of stripper.
There was a hilarious period where people were saying it wasn't about the breasts, it was about models getting a way for you to read their opinions. I was able to turn my eyes away once, and it was just 'I think we shouldn't go into Libya because wars are mean' - something like that.
Haha, good point!
Lilly, 34DD, believes that the base rate should be increased to 1.5% by the Bank of England to prevent runaway inflation.
They always made me laugh.
They were fantastic.
I'm not interested in movie stars. This is about the general population. As has already been established, I'm rather thick, so you'll have to explain to me better how the percentages I gave you in regard to pay are invalidated. According tonthensource I posted, equal work, and qualifications etc are all accounted for
Also, if you don't have time to argue my points that's fine, but can you at least explain to me why you're happy that men are falling behind in education?
In what part of her response insinuated that she was happy about men declining in educational influence?
Lilly Ledbetter was not a movie star. I did argue your point, singular, the issue is not who earns more over their careers or by job category. There are many examples, easily found of women being paid less for the same work.
It does you no good to post red herrings. I merely meant I would also look at those additional arguments because they are just like your college stats, people go to great lengths to deny reality that looks very bad when it is exposed to daylight. There are many rebuttals to those claims to have ruled out other variables and found equal pay.
Remember, you are talking to someone who has worked in one of the most seriously underpaid professions my whole career. I've experienced unequal pay in my own career. Nurse practitioners in my state have independent authority to practice as well as more education than physician assistants. PAs can only practice under a licensed physician. More PAs are male, more NPs are female.
One area hospital paid the PAs more than the NPs for the exact same positions because the PAs were in the physician department and the NPs were in the nursing department.
Nurse managers have always been underpaid compared to other hospital administrators despite having more employees under them and equal or greater responsibility.
So don't try to tell me that pay inequity has to do with childbearing and shorter careers because I have lived with this inequity most of my career.
@Fullmetal Xeno here you go
So personal experience is valid over statistics in this particular instance? Again, iv showed you statistics that show a much smaller gap.
"Good for us" can mean many things. If it was "Go Women, we can beat those idiotic males" than that accusation would be valid.
In the striving for equality, which is what feminists claim to aspire to , "good for us" is not an appropriate response. At the very least, one would expect, "yes that statistic is alarming. We should make sure of the reasons for this apparent inequality" not simply dismissing it as"men slack off," well lets just say if you said that about any other demographic, there'd be an explosion right now.
Also, @Fullmetal Xeno after "good for us " she says "we have a lot further to go" she also said "men slack off" What does this imply to you?
I meant he'd agree with you
I can understand where Numbers is coming from to some extent. But I would phrase it as follows: -
There are some people who want equality, and there are others who want privilege (and I am sure some of them would label themselves Feminists). The difficulty for the people seeking equality is trying to prevent those wanting privilege from derailing their argument, and they tend to derail the argument in two ways: -
turning the issue into some battle of the sexes rather than recognising that there are many men who want equality just as there are some (high profile) women who apparently don't.
throwing the term "misogyny" around like some get out of jail free card, while simultaneously throwing sexist and stereotypical labels at men.
They derail the argument because, rather than seeing people as people, they label men as a powerful and controlling force to be overcome and women as weak and oppressed, which only serves to reinforce the status quo.
That is my ten cents anyway.
Sometimes personal experience encompasses extensive expertise. It's one thing to say I was underpaid once. It's quite another to say I've had a long career as a nurse and nurse practitioner, and I've been a very active participant in lifting up that profession, not to mention knowing a lot about the issues: nursing being a mainly female profession, nursing's image in the media through time, lack of supply and demand pressures on wages as hospitals allowed staffing shortages rather than pay higher wages, the fight in this state to become an autonomous profession, the changes in the profession that resulted in defining nursing diagnoses, even the founder of the profession, Florence Nightingale, wasn't given her due credit as a scientist and statistician.
We aren't just talking about a couple personal anecdotes here.
And by the same token, some people bring this on themselves assuming every woman who wants equity must be trying to emasculate men.
Those statistics cover the whole breadth of all wages. The fact that there is a pay gap there is disturbing. But you're not showing statistics for men and women in the same positions. Where the actual pay gap is 26%
The role of women still have to meet the peak of what the men have had since the dawn of time? Ginger is not celebrating the failure of males, she's seeing the positive for women's efforts finally being recognized by statistics. The slacking nature of today's males is definitely not something to celebrate about. But neither is the reality of men driving over women.
I was speaking on the initial, broad terms put forth by the OP and @Ankoku Teion. I guess my post wasn't clear on that?
Unequal wages are a problem. I wasn't arguing against that. When it comes to job opportunities, though, there will be times when women are hired over men because of their gender. Daycares are a good example of this: I think people naturally trust women more. Reverse-sexism can definitely be a factor as well.
I'm not spinning this so men are facing hard odds—they're really not (yet); I just think it's important to note that this is not black and white. Each area needs to be worked on with tweezers and a magnifying glass:
Women deserve the same wage as their male counterparts.
Men who are sexually assaulted or living with spousal abuse shouldn't be dismissed with a snicker and handwave.
Women shouldn't have to treat getting from their car to their apartment door at midnight like crossing the raptor enclosure in Jurassic Park.
Potential employees should not be selected only on the basis of gender.
Fathers and mothers should be examined more objectively in child custody battles.
So we can add underpaid daycare worker to stripper and waitress.
I'll eventually think of other things! Eventually...
So...offering someone a ride is making them submissive?
"So what are you doing this afternoon?"
"Grocery shopping. God, I hate dragging the bags home on the bus."
"Want a ride? It's no trouble."
"How DARE you try to make me submit! Get away from me!"
"Huh? I was just..."
"Help! Help! Police! This woman is trying to force me to submit to a ride to the grocery! POLICE!"
Separate names with a comma.