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.
"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?
"Enough mansplainin' for ya?"
Yep ... Thats good mansplainin
If you doubt me, there must be contrary evidence out there. Don't criticize me for not being scientific if you're not willing to refute me.
Clothes that fit, especially jeans. Though perhaps the fit has gotten better over the years.