So to a large extent, yeah, you're right, supply and demand determines how much a certain type of work is paid. But you fail to account for the fact that often, supply is greater and demand is lower BECAUSE its believed to be something appropriate for a woman to be doing. It then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, used to justify why women really are just less productive, and thus should stick to lower-paying fields in the first place.
The market doesnt work that way, if people need something how important it is viewed as being will not affect the price. It would be awesome if it did work that way, we could just will oil to cost a penny a gallon.
Well. I think MLK would be very amused to hear that
I was talking about the individuals who identify as anti-racists in academia not a vague concept of anyone working against racism. You seem to do that a lot Tuss pretending the labels you choose for people have near magical power. It's like claiming the suffragists who rejected the title feminist were really feminists and just didn't know it. If someone goes through the trouble of saying "I'm not one of that group" theres a reason!
I have read the works of modern "anti-racists" and many argue MLK was a shill and that only Malcolm X was really worth taking seriously.
Vorthospike-Your argument suffers from the same critical flaw as Tuss's feminism=/=women. Feminism has intrinsic beliefs such as rapeculture and patriarchy that one can outright reject and still believe in equality between the sexes. Most women DO reject those beliefs as evidenced by their decision to not identify as feminist to conclude that women are just a bunch of idiots who don't get how awesome feminism is really shows just how ass backward feminist thinking on this issue is. Feminism represents a group of men and women who share it's beliefs not the population defined as "women".
Quote:
Originally Posted by joande This whole line of thinking strikes me as "If you disagree with feminism your secretly a terrible person".
That don't seem like much of a secret. It's kind of straightforward, like disagreeing with worker's liberation or anti-racist movements.
Workers movements (aka as unions) come with very real consequences and is a far more nuanced idea. Antiracists are some of the biggest racists out there, the basic tenent of their belief being that racism is a white thing which is itself racist. Having read the works of early CRT thinkers they absolutely believed a child inherits debts a parent accrues an idea so profoundly ass backwards I cant even express in words how repulsive and evil a society based on their beliefs would be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joande (only 19% identify as feminists in the US)
This is a very dishonest thing to say. There has been a large-scale effort of right-wing media to smear feminism and huge amounts of hatred is aimed at women who say they are feminists (presenting a physical danger to the people who dare to be outspoken). The term has been dragged through the mud, despite the actual idea still being popular.
So that only 19% of women say they identify as feminists when asked doesn't mean that all of the rest disagree with women's liberation.
Your viewpoint would be like a christian going through life claiming christianity alone bestows any moral sense whatsoever (yes such people exist). It's a patently absurd claim and one that the statistics show DOES NOT pan out in real life. Feminism is not women's liberation nor is it "The belief that men and women are equal" anymore then christianity=morals. One can entirely believe in gender equality and reject nonsense like feminism.
Also feminism is not unpopular because of the right that is patently absurd.
So since it might be harder to prove rape we should make that crime have a lower burden of proof?
What frightening is that its also much harder to prove you got consent then it is to prove other things, it will almost always literally be a he said/she said. The current screwrapeculture movements solution of making men official second class citizens via the "statistically women NEVER lie about rape" logic is terrifying from a civil rights perspective.
There is an old maxim in law that "it's better to let ten guilty people free than to convict one innocent person."
Blackstone's formulation is supposed to be the basis of the American justice system but sadly has been increasing ignored and is completely disregarded (with outright hatred) in feminist jurisprudence.
Jay13x-At this point, I've yet to come across someone who can adequately explain why the gap is that way, but in general the consensus is that women tend to poorer negotiators when it comes to setting their pay, thanks to cultural conditioning not to make waves. Don't know how true that is, as there isn't really evidence to support it.
As unpopular an opinion as this may be what if testosterone plays a part in why men earn more. It is called the "pride hormone" given that it has been shown to boost confidence something that would theoretically lead to more men pursueing raises/promotions. Comparing two individuals male/female you would see little difference but across the whole population (and taking into account the huge pay increases in higher management) a trend would emerge.
Irrational projecting of your problems on a person or a group of people, perceiving your problems are someone else's fault and so forth.
The funny thing is when you state that your experience/belief/etc. differs from theirs the first thing they do is try to dismiss you as projecting your problems onto them.
Originally Posted by bitterroot (Note: I'm not advocating for the opposite extreme, "it's not rape unless she explicitly says no." I am saying we need to investigate each rape on a case-by-case basis and not make hardline rules that require people to say certain magic words.)
But that's exactly what we do now.
What the first or second thing. Her not saying "no" is still considered rape in most states and at the same time I doubt you meant we have "magic words".
People only tend to be paranoid about false rape accusations when they have sex in situations where consent was not obvious in the first place
This whole line of thinking strikes me as "If you disagree with feminism your secretly a terrible person". Shocker MOST people dislike feminism, even most women (only 19% identify as feminists in the US), and plenty of people recognize how absurd the climate on college campuses concerning rape is;men, women, young, and old. Including the women who encouraged young men to call the women they sleep with to get a message to use later as proof. Personally it seems like a less then optimal strategy, getting proof ahead of time is really the best strategy.
Timothy Mimeslayer-The few things I have seen regarding this say that women and men who start an engineering job on average make the same amount but as time goes on, the men make more. Also, men on average work more hours per week than women do. It was something like for full time positions, men worked like an hour more per week or something of that sort.
Also, women tend to choose safer, more secure jobs that pay less whereas men take riskier, less safe jobs that pay more.
__________________
One of the things that irks me about the discussion of the "wage gap" to the point where I refer to it as a myth is the costs men pay to bring home that extra money is ignored. The "wage gap" is presented as proof that women are mistreated/discriminated against when that is the LEAST relevent factor.
Elvish Piper-So if we coerce her into sex, we should pressure her to say she liked it?
At first I was like "Wow that is one hell of a leap" but then I realized when one internalizes feminism one views every situation between the sexes as man=actor and women=acted upon this is just one of the problems with feminism and why it cannot truly fight sexism. That would be like the swine flu "ending the flu".
Izuki-I certainly agree that it is probably underreported but changing our laws (including forced to penetrate for example in the definition of rape) and cultural views on rape to de-gender it would surely help.
I could go on about the UN report that states that more men are raped in the the US prison system then women in 65 countries combined.
Theres also the fact that a gender neutral definition of rape puts males outside the prisons at 50% of the victims and women at 40% of the perpetrators.
Heres a question for you, since the rate of rape has gone down but no more then the rate of all other violent crimes why stick with an approach that may be accomplishing next to nothing, erases victims and perpetrators, and is quite frankly anti-male?
Ladyluck-The common factor between that, and what we were already talking about, is the male perpetrator. This tends to reinforce the idea that we're doing something wrong in what we're teaching men, culturally speaking. I still maintain that more comprehensive sex ed would help with these problems.
Perhaps more comprehensive sex education could help but ultimately focusing on the gender of the "perpetrator" is merely a strategy to reinforce the female victim/male perpetrator dynamic of feminism. Bringing up that the villains sharing the same gender as the victim is simply a means of erasing the victims and a pretty sick one at that. The majority of Americans who are victimized are victimized by Americans, should we therefore devote all our law enforcement resources to protecting non-Americans?
Ladyluck-You hear a lot more from the male end of it simply because there are more male-oriented spaces on the internet (male privilege blah blah), sure.
Funny, How the majority of rape victims in our society are male but all discussions about rape revolve around women victim, male rapist. (female privilege blah blah). Funny how when a man can't get a smoking hot girlfriend it's treated as a sign of a defect on his part but when women are unsatisfied it's a national crisis see "Where have all the good men gone". (female privilege blah blah).
It is NEVER useful, nor productive, to frame an issue as "Other group X, which I am not part of, is the entire problem and needs to do all the work fixing it". Because it's seriously not going to happen.
Ummm, this is feminism with the other group being men.
Ultimately the most productive thing we could do would be to move beyond the traditional/feminist views on rape and treat it as a genderless crime. Start punishing female rapists and start advocating for male victims, this would do a hell of a lot more to reduce rape then more of the same.
The problem is that most socialists are nuts who believe that expanding welfare is all upside, you could certainly argue there are capitalists like that too who despise any form of assistance.
The line between socialism and totalitarianism is also umm very very thin and that is largely the appeal for many liberals (who are totalitarian but just think they are socialists). As one quote I love goes... "In the heart of every liberal is a totalitarian screaming to get out."
In short if you can keep the programs efficient and meeting a real need (and not have it be about marxist social engineering schemes) I can get behind a lot of different forms of welfare.
That being said women should pay for their own birth control when it's like $9 a month, people on welfare should be encouraged to get jobs, and people on welfare who are like "I could work if I wanted to" are scum.
Is that gorgon the g/b god or is that too much to hope for?
The art provided does nothing to confirm or deny that Pharikas is a gorgon as God art always has the god centered against a large area of land to show their awesomeness and the gorgon art is a headshot in a confined space.
My understanding of this case is that the marital rape was entirely made out of the whole cloth and both Bobbitts were abusive. Looking at the Jodi Arias trial by comparison we have made some strides. "Womens tears" have lost some of their effectiveness and the Radfem nonsense at work with Bobbitt would hopefully get challenged (although not nearly enough).
The market doesnt work that way, if people need something how important it is viewed as being will not affect the price. It would be awesome if it did work that way, we could just will oil to cost a penny a gallon.
So women get no say. If they want to work for their own betterment they have to align with a group of man hating cultists. No, dream on.
I was talking about the individuals who identify as anti-racists in academia not a vague concept of anyone working against racism. You seem to do that a lot Tuss pretending the labels you choose for people have near magical power. It's like claiming the suffragists who rejected the title feminist were really feminists and just didn't know it. If someone goes through the trouble of saying "I'm not one of that group" theres a reason!
I have read the works of modern "anti-racists" and many argue MLK was a shill and that only Malcolm X was really worth taking seriously.
Vorthospike-Your argument suffers from the same critical flaw as Tuss's feminism=/=women. Feminism has intrinsic beliefs such as rapeculture and patriarchy that one can outright reject and still believe in equality between the sexes. Most women DO reject those beliefs as evidenced by their decision to not identify as feminist to conclude that women are just a bunch of idiots who don't get how awesome feminism is really shows just how ass backward feminist thinking on this issue is. Feminism represents a group of men and women who share it's beliefs not the population defined as "women".
Workers movements (aka as unions) come with very real consequences and is a far more nuanced idea. Antiracists are some of the biggest racists out there, the basic tenent of their belief being that racism is a white thing which is itself racist. Having read the works of early CRT thinkers they absolutely believed a child inherits debts a parent accrues an idea so profoundly ass backwards I cant even express in words how repulsive and evil a society based on their beliefs would be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joande
(only 19% identify as feminists in the US)
Your viewpoint would be like a christian going through life claiming christianity alone bestows any moral sense whatsoever (yes such people exist). It's a patently absurd claim and one that the statistics show DOES NOT pan out in real life. Feminism is not women's liberation nor is it "The belief that men and women are equal" anymore then christianity=morals. One can entirely believe in gender equality and reject nonsense like feminism.
Also feminism is not unpopular because of the right that is patently absurd.
What frightening is that its also much harder to prove you got consent then it is to prove other things, it will almost always literally be a he said/she said. The current screwrapeculture movements solution of making men official second class citizens via the "statistically women NEVER lie about rape" logic is terrifying from a civil rights perspective.
Blackstone's formulation is supposed to be the basis of the American justice system but sadly has been increasing ignored and is completely disregarded (with outright hatred) in feminist jurisprudence.
As unpopular an opinion as this may be what if testosterone plays a part in why men earn more. It is called the "pride hormone" given that it has been shown to boost confidence something that would theoretically lead to more men pursueing raises/promotions. Comparing two individuals male/female you would see little difference but across the whole population (and taking into account the huge pay increases in higher management) a trend would emerge.
The funny thing is when you state that your experience/belief/etc. differs from theirs the first thing they do is try to dismiss you as projecting your problems onto them.
What the first or second thing. Her not saying "no" is still considered rape in most states and at the same time I doubt you meant we have "magic words".
This whole line of thinking strikes me as "If you disagree with feminism your secretly a terrible person". Shocker MOST people dislike feminism, even most women (only 19% identify as feminists in the US), and plenty of people recognize how absurd the climate on college campuses concerning rape is;men, women, young, and old. Including the women who encouraged young men to call the women they sleep with to get a message to use later as proof. Personally it seems like a less then optimal strategy, getting proof ahead of time is really the best strategy.
Source for the 19%...http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/gregor-smith/feminism-men_b_4592448.html
__________________
One of the things that irks me about the discussion of the "wage gap" to the point where I refer to it as a myth is the costs men pay to bring home that extra money is ignored. The "wage gap" is presented as proof that women are mistreated/discriminated against when that is the LEAST relevent factor.
At first I was like "Wow that is one hell of a leap" but then I realized when one internalizes feminism one views every situation between the sexes as man=actor and women=acted upon this is just one of the problems with feminism and why it cannot truly fight sexism. That would be like the swine flu "ending the flu".
Infraction for trolling
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/men-outnumber-women-among-american-rape-victims/
I could go on about the UN report that states that more men are raped in the the US prison system then women in 65 countries combined.
Theres also the fact that a gender neutral definition of rape puts males outside the prisons at 50% of the victims and women at 40% of the perpetrators.
Heres a question for you, since the rate of rape has gone down but no more then the rate of all other violent crimes why stick with an approach that may be accomplishing next to nothing, erases victims and perpetrators, and is quite frankly anti-male?
Perhaps more comprehensive sex education could help but ultimately focusing on the gender of the "perpetrator" is merely a strategy to reinforce the female victim/male perpetrator dynamic of feminism. Bringing up that the villains sharing the same gender as the victim is simply a means of erasing the victims and a pretty sick one at that. The majority of Americans who are victimized are victimized by Americans, should we therefore devote all our law enforcement resources to protecting non-Americans?
Funny, How the majority of rape victims in our society are male but all discussions about rape revolve around women victim, male rapist. (female privilege blah blah). Funny how when a man can't get a smoking hot girlfriend it's treated as a sign of a defect on his part but when women are unsatisfied it's a national crisis see "Where have all the good men gone". (female privilege blah blah).
Ummm, this is feminism with the other group being men.
Ultimately the most productive thing we could do would be to move beyond the traditional/feminist views on rape and treat it as a genderless crime. Start punishing female rapists and start advocating for male victims, this would do a hell of a lot more to reduce rape then more of the same.
The line between socialism and totalitarianism is also umm very very thin and that is largely the appeal for many liberals (who are totalitarian but just think they are socialists). As one quote I love goes... "In the heart of every liberal is a totalitarian screaming to get out."
In short if you can keep the programs efficient and meeting a real need (and not have it be about marxist social engineering schemes) I can get behind a lot of different forms of welfare.
That being said women should pay for their own birth control when it's like $9 a month, people on welfare should be encouraged to get jobs, and people on welfare who are like "I could work if I wanted to" are scum.
The art provided does nothing to confirm or deny that Pharikas is a gorgon as God art always has the god centered against a large area of land to show their awesomeness and the gorgon art is a headshot in a confined space.