What exactly are women marching for?

[TotalInsanity4]

http://www.businessinsider.com/women-are-less-likely-to-get-promoted-2015-10

 

[FAST6191]

Interesting article, not sure what it is supposed to demonstrate and its ending thesis of "These results suggest that we're far from achieving gender equality in the workplace." seems at odds with the several of the "key results" they highlight in the preceding section. They also seem to swap between parity and equality where I am not sure they are the same thing.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Interesting article, not sure what it is supposed to demonstrate and its ending thesis of "These results suggest that we're far from achieving gender equality in the workplace." seems at odds with the several of the "key results" they highlight in the preceding section. They also seem to swap between parity and equality where I am not sure they are the same thing.

The article was more of just a digestible means of delivery for the study. The idea was to show that while, yes, on the surface level the issue of the wage gap would appear to have been solved, there's still clearly workplace discrimination that prevents women from earning the same amount by preventing promotions

 

[FAST6191]

Is that what you took away from that? Nowhere close to that for me.

Nothing there particularly spoke to anything saying people don't want people with ovaries doing stuff, just that for whatever reason those with ovaries don't want it and don't push for it at the same rates and that might then be reflected in the numbers involved. The only things that came close have "say" in the point and that is not so useful from where I sit, though I am also not sure how you might quantify it, much less sample for it.

I have been involved in recruitment at various levels (distasteful I know) and it is an absolute bastard whether you are hiring C level or entry level, to downplay ovary bearers would only serve to lengthen your pain as far as I can see and nobody wants that. At the same time wanting to achieve population representation in your organisation for a thing is irrelevant as gender is pretty perverse and counterproductive.

 

[blinkzane]

bling bling bling
delete me pweese

 

[Noj]

I'll talk about the military in another post but I still have more on the wage gap I want to talk about.
Edit: Also I never said women had full power over men. Men not having power doesn't mean women have full power. They both needed to do what was necessary to survive.

The earnings gap is actually a mother and father gap. Women who don’t marry and don’t have kids actually out earn men who are never married and never had kids. Women who don’t have kids make 117% of what men who don’t have kids make. Does this mean women who don’t have kids are discriminating men who don’t have kids? No it doesn’t. Does this mean men who have kids are discriminating men who don’t have kids. No it doesn’t. When they don’t have kids women make choices men normally make and men without kids make choices women normally make causing this earnings gap.

Asian men earn 117% of what white men earn. Does this mean whites are being discriminated against and asians have power in society. No. It would be stupid to think so. Asians just make choices that makes them earn more.

The earnings gap is caused when couples have kids. Women more often take time away from work to take care of the kids, leading to less hours, less overtime, less night shifts, more part time and less money. People then say its not fair that women are disadvantaged for having kids and men aren’t. What people don’t realize is that men are also disadvantaged for having kids. Since the wife is now earning less the man now has to make up for what the wife is not making and also needs to earn more because he now has more mouths to feed. He has to work more over time, work night shifts, find jobs that he less likes, sometimes taking a second job, sometimes even giving up his dream job just so he can earn more. This is why men who have kids out earn men who don’t have kids. Because now there is an incentive to earn more. Its the kids that causes the Earnings gap.

Having kids mean more work for the man. Not many people likes work. Just look at all the comments of people saying they wish they didn’t have to work so much. They said they would rather be at home with their family and wish they had more free time for hobbies like video games. But they have to work to take care of financial responsibilities. People don’t see how having kids also disadvantages the man.

No competent economists takes the wage gap seriously. There are many studies that control for variables, and wage gap practically disappears. Some studies shows that even with controlled variables there is a few cents in the gap, but often they are missing other variables causing the gap, like for example not including wage negotiation, which men more often do. When you look overall at multiple studies and look to control for variables then wage gap becomes basically non existent.

Wage gap isn’t a systemic discrimination out to get women. Why would a man want women to be payed less, which would to less money for the family and more work for himself to make up that difference? And wouldn’t a women making less mean more women would be hired over a man, because more money for the company. Companies would jump at any chance to increase their earnings.

If people see that the wage gap isn’t caused by paying women less, which is illegal by law, they blame it on society. They say that there is social discrimination and no push for women to earn more. Like women not negotiating higher wages. When women have no incentive to earn more because she has a husband to make the majority of money then she doesn’t have that same pressure to negotiate higher wages like men do. Data showing more women working part time then men should show that women don’t have as much incentive to earn more right?

Also usually when women gets custody of their kids in divorce, and can’t afford to have their kids, they can get governmental state benefits to help with costs. When a man can’t pay child support he goes to jail, there is hardly any governmental help for him. The man now has an incentive to earn more and negotiate higher wages or else it jail for him. The women having government taking care of some of those costs for her doesn’t have that same incentive. If people want to remove societal factors that causes women to earn less, then they would have to get rid of governmental social programs that help women. And how many are willing to do that?

Also women being able to choose to stay at home with the kids shows that they have choices rather than lack of choice. Remember they can only do this with access to governmental programs, and having a husband that earns enough, and earns the majority of money. If there is no husband and no government, then they can’t be a stay at home mom, can’t work part time, and would be forced to work full time to pay for their expenses. When a couple has kids, especially the first few months, 40% of women choose to work full time, 40% become stay at home moms, and 20% have a mixture of both. While for the male his choices are work, work, and work. The woman has choices to pick a life style that caters to her needs while the man doesn’t.

There was an article about women in the UK being more and more the primary breadwinner and the women said that they didn’t like it. They said that they felt really intense pressure, tiredness and strain to earn the majority of the money, and to have other people rely on them to bring home a steady pay check. But I thought that when men had to do this and have society push them more to earn more it was called male privilege and patriarchal oppression?

Found that an interesting read

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[Viri]

I vaguely remember some global news disaster involving Indian women kidnapped and such?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping
It's called "bride napping" and in some countries the police don't care, as it's part of their culture.

 

[DarthDub]

Modern feminism is a joke.

 

[Xzi]

Modern feminism is a joke.

Modern everything is a joke because there are always those people within every group who want to take things to the extreme. That's why we have the alt-right (neo-nazis, white nationalists, 1950s Republicans), Antifa, some overzealous sexual assault allegations (such as Aziz Ansari), North Korea, and Trump to deal with in modern America. When Donald Trump is president, we are the joke. You have to have the Joker's sick sense of humor to actually laugh at all of it, though, we're along for the ride on this out-of-control short bus with everybody else in the country who just wanted to play passive/neutral.

Actions have reactions, you see. Extremes breed extremes.

 

[Jayro]

We have equal pay here in the USA, because it would be illegal to discriminate. If anyone is getting less pay for the same work based on your sex, report it to the BBB immediately. Skip HR, skip supervisors, skip the CEO... Go right to the BBB. You won't face any resistance or retaliation this way, and those at fault will be dealt with accordingly.

 

[Viri]

If we didn't have equal gender pay, you'd see a shit ton more females being hired, and guys getting dumped. They'll fire some people to hire someone from over seas, they'd for sure sack a guy for a girl in a heart beat, if they could pay her less. Hell, they'd even make the guy train her too, lol.

 

[Soulsilve2010]

Modern feminism is a joke.

Another word for it is 3rd wave feminism and yes its a joke in 1st world countries.Their are still some 3rd world countries with bad culture but if you live in a first world country(like the US) you are not oppressed.I cannot really take american feminist seriously.