723 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

I am disinclined to untangle that at this time, StarduskLP. Let's say you have a few points but I think you're wrong in others. In particular, recall our little exchange about groups and individuals? If employers conclude from the fact that an applicant is a woman that she's going to work less and it's justified to pay her less, they are making a fallacious conclusion. If they were really non-discriminating, they'd start with paying everyone the same and differentiate by merit later, on an individual basis.

 

Also, I do not believe that the decisions of the staff departments are exclusively ruled by economic rationality. Nowhere in human society is this the case. Not even in the place which has long been described as the purest implementation of economic rationality - the stock exchange [to think that they actually taught me that at school back in the 1970s].

[SardaukarElite]

You do know how economic markets work? If women were paid less for identical work (hours, overtime, etc) no one would hire men because they could save tons of money by only hiring women. The truth is, women tend to do less overtime, work fewer hours, take off sick more often and schedule their lives differently than men do. Flexible hours and free time are more important to women than to men. The wage gap does not exist in the form that feminists claim it does. They do not take into account number of hours worked, overtime, sick leave, type of work, etc. Recall from our private conversation that working long hours (or doing dangerous work for that matter) offers women no reproductive advantage whereas men gain resources and status from it, which are important in order to attract a mate. 

 

Just to check, you're actually saying that women won't work as hard as men because they can just find a man to provide for them?

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

Just to check, you're actually saying that women won't work as hard as men because they can just find a man to provide for them?

No. I am saying that reproductive incentives for men and women are very different and have consequences for each in terms of the work they take on. Women are much more risk averse than are men, generally speaking. Consider how many women take on dangerous and dirty work such as working at an oil refinery, in the sewers, on telephone poles, etc. compared to men. Along with genetic fitness, the most important asset a man can offer a woman is resources, which in today's era translates as money whereas men are primarily concerned with genetic fitness. Women do not gain anything from a reproductive stance by doing dangerous and dirty work or by doing massive amounts of overtime. In fact, these things could negatively affect their genetic fitness. 

[stop_him]

In regards to those statements (ex. race vs. athletic giftedness and race vs. brain structure/intelligence capacity): Can you point out the biological factors that make it probable that black women (receiving the best education, diet, and standard of living) would be intellectually inferior (score lower on standardized tests for intelligence, rare in math and engineering fields) to an Asian or Ashkenazi Jewish man (receiving the same)? Or are these lower test scores indicative of some other factor(s) (as opposed to the innate intellectual inferiority of certain racial groups--minus of course a few exceptional individuals that are rare)? Should we be treated differently by our teachers in the classroom because of our race and gender, in order to get us to score better, because otherwise we would be outperformed by whites and Asians and men? Should we have different expectations of people in math and science fields because of their gender and race?

 

Maybe more extreme efforts must be made. Do black women (the group to which I belong) as a racial/gender group in the future, for example, need to undergo genetic therapy (if there is a genetic impediment to our intellectual capacity, such that our brain structure is the issue) to repair our intellectual deficiencies and put us on par intellectually with groups such as Caucasian and Asian men who score better on standardized tests and dominate the engineering field and Nobel prizes?

 

It's support for arguments that race is genetic, intelligence is genetic, and certain races are more intelligent than others due to genetics, unless your are an exceptional individual in your racial group, that have lead to blacks constantly being likened to apes /animals in the past as opposed to equal to the intellectual superiors (white and Asians).

 

Maybe I am misunderstanding. But if I am genetically inferior (or genetics make my brain inferior) to an Asian or white male (all else being equal) because I am a black female when it comes to the IQ, then I should just give up and let my betters take over the math and science industries, and go back to a cookin and cleanin, and being a breeding cow, which given my genetic predisposition to larger arm and leg muscle proportions and my large hip and rump size I should excel at. After all we should do what our racial/gender groups are genetically good for to maximize the good we can do for humanity in the future, and no one wants an inferior engineer.

No, you're a women like me, so you're just f*****. Let's go learn the finer points of ironing.

[Ieldra]

No, you're a women like me, so you're just f*****. Let's go learn the finer points of ironing.

Or you could use the example of my boss - a competent and ambitious scientist and a workaholic. She never stops. I've gotten emails from her sent at 3am on a Sunday. Not that I recommend her working pattern for anyone, man or woman alike, but I'd like to reinforce the point that statistical behaviour patterns are irrelevant for an individual.

 

I am, in fact, much less ambitious than she is, which is why I don't have her kind of job - for which I thank fate every second day.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

Or you could use the example of my boss - a competent and ambitious scientist and a workaholic. She never stops. I've gotten emails from her sent at 3am on a Sunday. Not that I recommend her working pattern for anyone, man or woman alike, but I'd like to reinforce the point that statistical behaviour patterns are irrelevant for an individual.

 

I am, in fact, much less ambitious than she is, which is why I don't have her kind of job - for which I thank fate every second day.

Does your boss have children and/or a husband?

[Ieldra]

Does your boss have children and/or a husband?

Both.

[Panda]

You do know how economic markets work? If women were paid less for identical work (hours, overtime, etc) no one would hire men because they could save tons of money by only hiring women. The truth is, women tend to do less overtime, work fewer hours, take off sick more often and schedule their lives differently than men do. Flexible hours and free time are more important to women than to men. The wage gap does not exist in the form that feminists claim it does. They do not take into account number of hours worked, overtime, sick leave, type of work, etc. Recall from our private conversation that working long hours (or doing dangerous work for that matter) offers women no reproductive advantage whereas men gain resources and status from it, which are important in order to attract a mate. 

 

Actually those are quite often taken accord and discussed since they big part of what makes wage gap in many countries.

[KingofTime]

But according to Bioware's statistics, male inquisitors outnumber female two to one.

As it should be, the results will be even more skewed when ME:A roles out.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

Both.

Interesting. Certainly an outlier.

[o Ventus]

Just to check, you're actually saying that women won't work as hard as men because they can just find a man to provide for them?

 

I'm not sure what you read to come to that conclusion.

[The Night Haunter]

You do know how economic markets work? If women were paid less for identical work (hours, overtime, etc) no one would hire men because they could save tons of money by only hiring women. The truth is, women tend to do less overtime, work fewer hours, take off sick more often and schedule their lives differently than men do. Flexible hours and free time are more important to women than to men. The wage gap does not exist in the form that feminists claim it does. They do not take into account number of hours worked, overtime, sick leave, type of work, etc. Recall from our private conversation that working long hours (or doing dangerous work for that matter) offers women no reproductive advantage whereas men gain resources and status from it, which are important in order to attract a mate. 

Except the people doing the hiring (at the top at least) are all men, and they have a lot of male friends. Only 17% of CEOs in the US are women (as of 2014, I don't have today's statistics handy), and you might recall back in 2012 when Marissa Mayer was hired as Yahoo's CEO it made the news (far more than Apple's and Microsoft's changing CEOs in recent years).

 

Wage discrimination is real, and is prevalent throughout America saying its not by trying to find loop holes like 'flexible hours' is silly. It isn't as bad today as it once was and it gets better all the time (ironically through natural processes rather than feminist rants, as any type of 'privileged' group making speeches and going on rants only serves to consolidate the differences rather than break them down. Progress must be natural and not forced, for proof look at Russia's failed attempt to artificially urbanize and their awful attempt at skipping to socialism without the economic foundation, but thats enough of that).

 

 

Anyway I don't really think this topic serves a purpose anymore, no-one has ever convinced anyone else of anything on the internet. Neither side is ever going to do anything more than 'agree-to-disagree', so lets give it a rest so I can see some other threads at the top of the list

[o Ventus]

 

They're paid less for the same work in most jobs.

 

They actually aren't. 

 

I know this isn't going to bear any fruit, but I would love to see evidence of this. And by evidence, I mean actual empirical data and not some second-hand anecdote of a single occurrence that isn't in any way indicative of society at large.

 

edit: here's a handy-dandy video that more or less sums up this stupid pay gap trash and why it's trash. It even uses several of the same sources I cite when I address the issue. There is swearing in the video, but he covers the point very fluently and civilly.

 

[Panda]

Well this is how wage gap is discussed in my country:

 

“There are fewer women in leadership positions, while the responsibility for childcare is distributed unevenly in families,” she explains. “Within sectors, women work in positions that are lower paid than men’s. Women’s work is appreciated less.”

This does not mean that women are paid less than men for carrying out exactly the same tasks. Rather, jobs in female-heavy sectors tend to draw lower salaries than jobs in industries dominated by men. In the same field, jobs usually held by women pay less than ones typically held by men."

 

http://yle.fi/uutise..._europe/5443141

 

So those who are saying that wage gap is myth and bringing up points against it aren't actually countering wage gap at all in sense it's spoken in my country, they are pretty much proving it by listing reasons why it exist. O Ventus's video included.

 

EDIT: I'm not saying that there isn't shady business doing illegal things and discriminating women at all, but that's not what makes majority of wage gap in the countries.

[The Oracle]

I'm very lucky to live in the UK. Our employment laws tend to make it so that things like pay gaps etc are a rare thing. There's also been lots of great leaps in terms of shared maternity/paternity leave, meaning that now maternity leave can be split equally between two partners, allowing men more than the statutory two weeks of leave to bond with their kids. Also, having worked in our court system for a good number of years, child custody is slowly easing from an "always the mother" to a far more considered approach with additional family mediation. It's small steps, but good ones.

 

Every couple I know with kids now have two working parents who both take equal responsibility for their care. Gender defined roles of "woman = housewife, man = earner" have been blurred to the point of non-existent for most of the baby boomers of this decade. Things are shifting socially and the next generation will, if this trend continues, find themselves growing up in a world where gender doesn't determine the jobs you can train for, only aptitude. If my 5 year old niece wants to take her fascination with scalextric to become a car mechanic in the future, she'll likely be able to do so without the stigma of it not being a "womans" job. We live in exciting times.

[BansheeOwnage]

That's Lilaeya Lavellan, a female mage. I didn't think it wasn't completely obvious.

Honestly, I wouldn't have been sure if I didn't see you say you usually played women. It's an elf thing. I've been wrong or unsure about the gender of some other elf Inquisitors too.

 

Anyway, this thread sucks now, unfortunately. Can we go back to collectively laughing at idiots? That was fun. Pages arguing over statistics isn't.

[Ieldra]

Can we go back to collectively laughing at idiots? That was fun. Pages arguing over statistics isn't.

I'd love to. Everything's been said about the other stuff anyway.

You know, I've just thought of indulging in a bit of trolling and posting somewhere where people are interested in games but not knowledgable about DAI that you aren't allowed to play a man in DAI. Just imagining the exploding heads put me in a good mood.

[The Night Haunter]

I'd love to. Everything's been said about the other stuff anyway.

You know, I've just thought of indulging in a bit of trolling and posting somewhere where people are interested in games but not knowledgable about DAI that you aren't allowed to play a man in DAI. Just imagining the exploding heads put me in a good mood.

If you want to go whole-hog you can make a few fake articles saying DA4 is confirmed Dwarven Women protagonists only, rant a bit in some of the article sand post links to 'em somewhere and see what happens (and get some popcorn)  

[SardaukarElite]

No. I am saying that reproductive incentives for men and women are very different and have consequences for each in terms of the work they take on. Women are much more risk averse than are men, generally speaking. Consider how many women take on dangerous and dirty work such as working at an oil refinery, in the sewers, on telephone poles, etc. compared to men. Along with genetic fitness, the most important asset a man can offer a woman is resources, which in today's era translates as money whereas men are primarily concerned with genetic fitness. Women do not gain anything from a reproductive stance by doing dangerous and dirty work or by doing massive amounts of overtime. In fact, these things could negatively affect their genetic fitness. 

 

Okay, but you are saying that gaining resources counts as a 'reproductive advantage' for men and not for women? You're saying that the most important asset a man can offer a woman is resources? Because it seems to me resources would be an advantage for everyone, so if women don't do better paying work (as you say) then resource gain is less of an incentive, so they have to be getting them somewhere else and you've said that men can offer women resources.

 

Actually this is silly. Women do dangerous work, and they do high paying work, and they do overtime for more complex reasons than reproductive advantage. They also don't do all these things for more complex reasons than reproductive advantage.

[stop_him]

Or you could use the example of my boss - a competent and ambitious scientist and a workaholic. She never stops. I've gotten emails from her sent at 3am on a Sunday. Not that I recommend her working pattern for anyone, man or woman alike, but I'd like to reinforce the point that statistical behaviour patterns are irrelevant for an individual.

 

I am, in fact, much less ambitious than she is, which is why I don't have her kind of job - for which I thank fate every second day.

Ah, but apparently she is an outlier. I don't know why I'm bothering with my advanced science degree, what with a man at home AND potential children in my future! I must learn how to iron all the shirts!  How could I possibly manage ironing all the shirts and working? If only I had a supportive spouse who would be more than willing to mind the chores around house (like ironing all the shirts), and help raise the children he helped create. But that's just nonsense; everybody knows men aren't helpful! 

[Donk]

 

 

 

 

More women behave poorly with other women than men do. This is also the subject of a number of studies. Yet for some reason feminist idiots like to blame "the patriarchy".

 

 

 

 

The Department of Labor (where I take my figures from when people want me to present them) is a fairly legitimate source, I would wager. At least for the United States, I'm not sure what country you're from.
 

 

 

No, it is not. Anecdotal evidence and eyewitness testimony is notoriously bad for proving a case because it presents only 1 side of the story. There's a reason why eyewitness testimonies are thrown away in court rulings without sufficient physical evidence.

 

 

 

And this is the reason I said what I said up above. You haven't described what kind of work you do, what level of experience you have, what kind of work your co-worker is doing, what his experience is, his position in the company compared to yours, etc. All you're saying is "he's a man and makes more than me, therefore sexism", which in itself is so devoid of any internal logic that it's just a long non-sequitur.

 

 

 

 

Again. One-sided, but this time with a bunch of "supposedly"s thrown in there. None of this is empirical proof of anything. 
 

 

 

You yourself keep saying "supposedly", which indicates that you don't actually know the truth and are instead acting on faith.

 

 

 

And the people who think this are wrong.

 

 

 

 

Presuming to think for victims of domestic violence is a rather a**hole-ish thing to do, no? 

 

 

 

 

Depends on the context. In an abusive relationship where there is a clear divide in power between the two parties, you can very easily help the victim by calling the police and offering them shelter. If it's a young 20-something woman who has recently graduated from university with her brand new gender studies degree and she complains that she can't find any work, then you're absolutely right. She didn't help herself by devoting years of her life to getting that useless degree, and nothing anyone else does is going to save her now.

 

 

Why is it that whenever somebody debates with me, they have this expectation that I need to prove something to them?

 

Should I tell you which brand toilet paper I wipe my arse with as well?

 

In the example I gave, for all I know the other worker who was given a higher wage with less hours could have been blowing the boss. Either way, it's unfair favouritism and no better than a potential "sexist" motive. And note I did not scream "sexism" I said I was unsure of whether to determine it as such. You just made the assumption cause it appeals to your "anti-feminist" stance.

 

And as I also stated, you can dismiss my claims all you like. In fact, I expected you would. I don't care what you think, you have a free mind. All I'm saying is that I know what went down, and "debunking", "surveys" and "research" with obvious biases doesn't throw my experience, nor others who have had similar experiences out the window.

 

We have different opinions -- you are of the belief that feminism is just a bullshit movement. And in some cases, you are right. The problem with this line of thinking is that people with genuine concerns will be fobbed off and dismissed by people with your attitude based on a certain sub-group within the feminist "group" who gives them a bad name.

 

"Presuming to think for victims of domestic violence is a rather a**hole-ish thing to do, no?"

I do not "presume" to think for anybody. It was an example, which I also have personal experience in because I worked in a women's shelter for some time. But of course, you want evidence, right? Should I send you copies of my payslips from that period of my working life?

 

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. As I said, differing opinions and what not. We can't force others to believe something. You are more than entitled to yours whether I agree or not. Unlike some people, I don't expect you to adhere to or "prove" anything. I was just sharing an opinion, and obviously the subject of "feminism" riles you up.

 

As somebody wise in this thread has already stated, this "group thought" needs to be cast off in order for the world to go somewhere "nice" in the future. It is becoming counter-productive and has been for some time.

 

I am simply a nobody, that makes snarky comments and has an opinion or 10 on different subjects. I like to consider myself having a "free mind", and in most cases I stay out of this kind of crap and just do my own thing. People have told me I would make a great politician -- but honestly I would eat my dog's arse hole before I'd do such a thing. I'd much rather just play video games, drink booze and enjoy other pleasures of life.. people's "issues" no matter what side of the fence, just aren't worth the hassle.

[Majestic Jazz]

Why is it that whenever somebody debates with me, they have this expectation that I need to prove something to them?

Well wouldnt you want to debate your argument/stance with facts instead of just opinions?

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

Why is it that whenever somebody debates with me, they have this expectation that I need to prove something to them?

 

Should I tell you which brand toilet paper I wipe my arse with as well?

 

In the example I gave, for all I know the other worker who was given a higher wage with less hours could have been blowing the boss. Either way, it's unfair favouritism and no better than a potential "sexist" motive. And note I did not scream "sexism" I said I was unsure of whether to determine it as such. You just made the assumption cause it appeals to your "anti-feminist" stance.

 

And as I also stated, you can dismiss my claims all you like. In fact, I expected you would. I don't care what you think, you have a free mind. All I'm saying is that I know what went down, and "debunking", "surveys" and "research" with obvious biases doesn't throw my experience, nor others who have had similar experiences out the window.

 

We have different opinions -- you are of the belief that feminism is just a bullshit movement. And in some cases, you are right. The problem with this line of thinking is that people with genuine concerns will be fobbed off and dismissed by people with your attitude based on a certain sub-group within the feminist "group" who gives them a bad name.

 

"Presuming to think for victims of domestic violence is a rather a**hole-ish thing to do, no?"

I do not "presume" to think for anybody. It was an example, which I also have personal experience in because I worked in a women's shelter for some time. But of course, you want evidence, right? Should I send you copies of my payslips from that period of my working life?

 

Anyhow, it doesn't matter. As I said, differing opinions and what not. We can't force others to believe something. You are more than entitled to yours whether I agree or not. Unlike some people, I don't expect you to adhere to or "prove" anything. I was just sharing an opinion, and obviously the subject of "feminism" riles you up.

 

As somebody wise in this thread has already stated, this "group thought" needs to be cast off in order for the world to go somewhere "nice" in the future. It is becoming counter-productive and has been for some time.

 

I am simply a nobody, that makes snarky comments and has an opinion or 10 on different subjects. I like to consider myself having a "free mind", and in most cases I stay out of this kind of crap and just do my own thing. People have told me I would make a great politician -- but honestly I would eat my dog's arse hole before I'd do such a thing. I'd much rather just play video games, drink booze and enjoy other pleasures of life.. people's "issues" no matter what side of the fence, just aren't worth the hassle.

Obligatory drop bear pic joke....

 

[Dieb]

Since we have now established sexism as an opinion, this thread and humanity is going places.

o Ventus, there is an article debunking this sadly popular video bit for bit, (and I'm not going to pretend there isn't always going to be one) which I shall fetch for you once I get home.

I'm happy for you that you will never find out whether those very comfortable opinions of yours are right or not; but for the rest of us, we don't have the luxury of calling this outlook on life seeing people as individuals. Ironically, if everyone did that, there would be no issue to speak of.

It's a little like a warden saying he sees prisoners as free lodgers - it's not really his to define their hardship. He didn't do anything to them personally, and all they really do is complaining.

[ColorTheSky]

This about sums up how I felt before and just after joining the BSN. Lol thanks for the laugh 

 

As for this particular thread, well... I was going to comment on a few things, but as someone above has stated, this thread has gone places. I'll just say that its getting rather annoying to see all of these unnecessary... I'm just going to call it "gender wars", being started because of one comment made on who plays what or because of one shared statistic report.