This is what I need to know.  I don't want to comment, only listen. 

Views: 2324

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I find this statement incredibly presumptuous: "For men, it often means how well one does the job whereas for women it often comes down to the job title." Where are you getting that? That's not what I mean when I say "equal pay for equal work." It means "I worked as hard as you, if not harder, so I expect to paid in kind."

Actually, I don't know where you're getting ANY of your statements. What makes you think women take more time off? I almost never call-in; I have to practically be on my death bed to call in. The same is true of my friends and peers. We have to perform at a higher level to have any kind of respect, and then there's still this persisting idea we take more time off. And smoking men don't take smoke breaks? I don't smoke, so I don't take smoke brakes... and I also rarely go the the restroom while I'm working... and that's also true of most of my peers.

I mean, what women are you even talking about? If you did REAL research, you'd find that most women work their fucking asses off. I don't understand how you can make these sweeping generalizations with nothing but your gut instinct to go off of.

I find this statement incredibly presumptuous: "For men, it often means how well one does the job whereas for women it often comes down to the job title." Where are you getting that? That's not what I mean when I say "equal pay for equal work." It means "I worked as hard as you, if not harder, so I expect to paid in kind."

If you follow the equal pay for equal work fights, the women cite statistics comparing how much each sex makes as if that ends it. It doesn't, one also needs proof that the women are as valuable to the organization as the men. 

Actually, I don't know where you're getting ANY of your statements.

Then you didn't ask Google.

There are things a raw statistic doesn't show:

Statistically, women make less than men because they put in fewer hours: Today, childless 20-something women (actually) earn more than their male peers. But most are likely to cut back their hours after they have kids, giving men the hours, and income, advantage. (source)

In fact, this article is a treasure trove of reasons why women make (and seemingly will always make) less than men for "the same work."

Women, in fact, make up two-thirds of America's part-time workforce. A just-released report from the New York Federal Reserve has even found that "opting-out" by midcareer college-educated wives, especially those with wealthy husbands, has been increasing over the past 20 years.

Activists tend to offer two solutions for this state of affairs. First is that fathers should take equal responsibility for child care. After all, while men have tripled the number of hours they're in charge of the kids since 1970, women still put in more hours on the domestic front. But even if we could put a magic potion in the nation's water supply and turn 50% of men into Mr. Mom, that still leaves the growing number of women with no father in the house. Over 40% of American children are now born to unmarried women. A significant number—though not a majority—are living with their child's father at birth. But in the next few years when those couples break up, which is what studies show they tend to do, guess who will be left minding the kids?

Which brings us to the second proposed solution for the hours gap: generous family-leave and child-care policies. Sweden and Iceland are frequently held up as models in this regard, and they do have some of the most extensive paternity and maternity leave and publicly funded child care in the world.

Yet even they also have a persistent hours and wage gap. In both countries, mothers still take more time off than fathers after the baby arrives. When they do go back to work, they're on the job for fewer hours. Iceland's income gap is a yawning 38%—that is, the average women earns only 62 cents to a man's dollar. Even Sweden's 15% gap—though lower than our 23% one—is far from full parity.

All over the developed world women make up the large majority of the part-time workforce, and surveys suggest they want it that way. According to the Netherlands Institute for Social Research, in 2008 only 4% of the 70% of Dutch women who worked part-time wished they had a full-time job. A British Household Panel Survey interviewing 3,800 couples discovered that among British women, the happiest were those working part-time.

So, the women who do work may work their fucking asses off, as you say, but that doesn't really get at the real reasons why the statistics show (and likely will always show) women earning less. But the statistics are misleading: they do NOT show that women who are equivalent workers to men in every way don't earn the same, or something very much approaching the same...or maybe even a bit more.

Cara, I know I gave you a lot to absorb there, but I hope you can see now why the usual blah-de-blah about women making less than men may simply be due to women opting out of opportunities for advancement if the advancement would impact their family life, preferring to work part-time, having children without fathers, and so on. 

Looking back on my life, it's been clear that my female coworkers more than my male coworkers bonded with their associates and ignored openings they might have applied for if the new job would have taken them away from their coworker friends or, worse, away from their parents and other family members. Women are more sentimental than men and that, too, inhibits their advancement. For better or worse, an ability to be cold can be a real advantage in the business world, and men are just better at it.

If that's their definition of "equal pay for equal work", then I take issue with it. If all they're looking at how much someone makes vs how much they work, then that's fallacious and inaccurate. I'd like to read more about this, but I certainly don't expect to make $50K (or whatever) just because a man in a similar position makes it; not if I didn't put in the hours he did! That *is* BS.But I do feel the argument is more nuanced than that.

Then we agree that the stats generally presented by women's advocates are of the unnuanced variety. Generally they just take a job description and tell us what the average woman makes vs. what the average man makes and present it lacking all nuance. A more fair statistical comparison would take out of the stats (on both sides) part-time workers (many of them preferring to work part-time); workers who would rather not advance if it means leaving their coworkers, friends, or family (generally more of a consideration for women than men); people who are not good at negotiating raises; etc. Unfortunately, those more accurate statistics are hard to find, but very likely would show male/female pay quite a bit closer than the advocates say, and possibly on a par.

"I think that is why gays, especially women, get on so well,they understand the others thinking - no contest."

Not always so. I've dated women all my life and have a wife of 9 years. Women can be the most passive aggressive creatures ever. I tell my wife, I don't know what you want. Tell me. I am not psychic. Open your damn mouth and say something. So just because someone is with someone of the same sex doesn't not mean we automatically understand what each other is thinking or wanting. I believe this issue is just as prevalent in the gay community as well. 

@Yahweh - what do you call 'special privileges - respect, and that is about it. Sense of humour, very important, and not to take oneself too seriously.I feel sorry for blokes who are honest and genuine, and who do get used by women.

That is not to say, there are some absolute cows and loony tunes in the female gender, but I always paid my own way, didn't want to feel beholden to anyone :)

So, if a female widget maker makes statistically 15% less than a male, they will jump on that as an unfair pay differential - no, I mean equal amount of work, equal amount of pay. If a man does more, he gets paid more, if a female does more, she gets paid more.

They're addicted to (and yes, men do this, too, but probably in smaller numbers) - that is an assumption. Your bias is showing.

Additionally, they may be less likely to keep going after closing time in order to make sure the work gets done ASAP. - Not here, they don't.

Yes, they may be taking off to pick up their children, but having a child is a personal choice and when one has one, one accepts the consequences - well, in Australia, fathers get maternity leave, sick leave to look after sick kids, parental leave, pick up kids from school, take the kids to swimming lessons, whatever. It is called a civilized society, a society that is catching up to the modern family, a family where both parents work - so it is just as likely men leaving work, as it is for women.

I expect apples to be compared to apples.

Find the woman who might as well be a man in terms all the above - there it is again, your bias is showing. We have a female Prime Minster, a female Finance Minister, many female Senators etc. etc. etc. If a woman is strong and forthright, she is a bitch, if a man is strong and forthright, that is how he should be, after all he is a man :). You are dealing with millennia old stereotypes, and they are really hard to get rid of. Keeping in mind, it was only in the 1940's if a woman married, she had to quite her job, so there is a lot of catching up to do, and a lot of education to be had.

Most stereotypes have a kernel of truth. And most feminist "solutions" involve changing things that aren't going to change anytime soon and that most of us (women included) don't really want to change very much.

BTW, have you been following the controversy surrounding Susan Sandberg's new book

For a book that has yet to be released, Sheryl Sandberg's "Lean In" - part feminist manifesto, part how-to career guide - has got a lot of people talking.

In the weeks leading up to the book's release on Monday, pundits and press hounds have been debating its merits. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd called Sandberg a "PowerPoint Pied Piper in Prada ankle boots," and countless bloggers have suggested that Facebook's chief operating officer is the wrong person to lead a women's movement.

"Most of the criticism has to do with the position she is coming from," said Susan Yohn, professor and chair of Hofstra University's history department.Sandberg, 43, hopes that her message of empowerment won't be obscured by the lofty pedestal from which she speaks. But is the multi-millionaire with two Harvard degrees too rich to offer advice? Too successful? Does her blueprint for success ignore the plight of poor and working-class women? Does the book's very premise blame women for not rising to top corporate positions at the same rate as men? (source)

It seems women don't want advice from a successful woman if it doesn't blame men or male culture or a paternalistic society. Her point, as I understand it, is that women experience a so-called glass ceiling because they are less likely to want to be leaders, which leaves only exceptional women to compete with men in the workplace.

Actually, Ms. Sandberg's first name is Sheryl, not Susan, as I wrote. It's too late to edit it, but I wanted to straighten that out. 

This ...

"which leaves only exceptional women to compete with men in the workplace."

Only exceptional women compete with men in the workplace!!!

I nearly choked on my Coco Pops when I read that ...

Mansplain that for me please because I dont view women who compete with men as exceptional...

Okay, read it as "leaves only exceptional women to compete on an equal footing with men in the workplace." I thought that's what I was saying, but I hope this makes the thought more explicit. By "exceptional," to be even clearer, I don't mean "better" in any way, just "different from most women in that they compete more like men do."

Enough mansplainin' for ya?


Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin



Things you hate.

Started by Devlin Cuite in Small Talk. Last reply by kris feenstra 2 hours ago. 156 Replies

Blog Posts

Dead man's Switch

Posted by Philip Jarrett on April 18, 2014 at 11:29pm 0 Comments


  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out

Advertise with

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service