actually more than anything else it all depends on what you use as qualifications, and what your assumptions are. who knows, maybe there are "standard" govt. rules regarding what is "full-time" and what isn't. in which case there'd be no reason to pick apart a study, because according to the rules, it's accurate.
as for
Quote:
I'm sorry to wander so far off, but I just can't think of an area where women could ever compete as easily with men as tech and yet men are 90-95% of the people employed in it.
that probably has more to do with the fact that most woman can get laid any time they want to, and therefore aren't forced to spend countless hours in front of a computer screen. w/o this forced exile/learning, they're at a serious disadvantage when it comes to computing background.
I have studied a bit of statistics and have always had an affinity for numbers but surely it is obvious to everyone that statisticians can account for confounding factors. In fact, to a great degree, that is all they do.
If these studies hadn't accounted for the obvious factors like age, education, job type etc. then other statisticians would have have taken the report to pieces and you would be able to provide a link to a source saying how wrong these figures are.
You are right except you have to consider the political climate. Ethnic and gender studies have rarely come under true scrutiny because it is hard to challenge someone on so sensitive a topic. I mean there still is the court of public opinion to consider. Being say, a white male and publishing a paper saying that claims of rape are fictitious about 60% of the time and that instead of 1 in every 4 women being raped it is more like 1 woman every 4 colleges would get you pure hell from the political hate police out there.
They would like say you are condoning rape, violence against women, etc.
You might be surprised how often certain things get repeated over and over again.
Lastly you consider same to mean same. The people publishing these types of reports don't. The phrase is quite clear, equal pay for equal work. It is intentional and if you do any searches on equal work equal pay and compartive work you will see what I am talking about. Most feminist organizations consider it repressive that plumbers earn more than secretaries and things like that. Since they don't want certain jobs, they would prefer to take the ones they do want and declare them comparable.
If you don't believe me look up the equal pay act of 1963. It is AGAINST THE LAW to pay someone a differente amount for the same work because of their gender. Comparative worth, is what they are arguing for.
actually more than anything else it all depends on what you use as qualifications, and what your assumptions are. who knows, maybe there are "standard" govt. rules regarding what is "full-time" and what isn't. in which case there'd be no reason to pick apart a study, because according to the rules, it's accurate.
that probably has more to do with the fact that most woman can get laid any time they want to, and therefore aren't forced to spend countless hours in front of a computer screen. w/o this forced exile/learning, they're at a serious disadvantage when it comes to computing background.
Oh the government considers full-time anything 32 hours or above. I just meant that if you worked 50 hours a week and I worked 32 hours, we would both be considered full-time. When I made 65% of what you did, it wouldn't be discrimination or repression. The government would classify us both the same though and say that you were paid 35% more than me.
As to the women and computers this is true, not desperately needing to get laid likely does play into it.
But in that instance, who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed?
You are right except you have to consider the political climate. Ethnic and gender studies have rarely come under true scrutiny because it is hard to challenge someone on so sensitive a topic. I mean there still is the court of public opinion to consider. Being say, a white male and publishing a paper saying that claims of rape are fictitious about 60% of the time and that instead of 1 in every 4 women being raped it is more like 1 woman every 4 colleges would get you pure hell from the political hate police out there.
They would like say you are condoning rape, violence against women, etc.
You might be surprised how often certain things get repeated over and over again.
Lastly you consider same to mean same. The people publishing these types of reports don't. The phrase is quite clear, equal pay for equal work. It is intentional and if you do any searches on equal work equal pay and compartive work you will see what I am talking about. Most feminist organizations consider it repressive that plumbers earn more than secretaries and things like that. Since they don't want certain jobs, they would prefer to take the ones they do want and declare them comparable.
If you don't believe me look up the equal pay act of 1963. It is AGAINST THE LAW to pay someone a differente amount for the same work because of their gender. Comparative worth, is what they are arguing for.
Nick
A couple of points. Rape is a touchy issue, but the numbers are not simply based on random claims. Still, for 1/30 males to have been raped is a very high percentage in my mind -- this is the one act that removes the self-will of the victim so much so at time i think it should be punished equally to murder, so regardless of whether the 1/4 or 1/3 numbers for women are accurate the fact remains it is a problem...
Secondly, the numbers for money earned are across the board numbers, not this career for that etc etc... What this means is that to some degree women are still systematically not found in many high paying jobs, for instance CEO's of large corporations or even in the management positions of corporations or even small liberal arts colleges etc. Still further is the unbalanced maternal expectations of women; to be a woman in science, for instance, is very hard given the expectations of these careers on time and location during the most likely time that people would be starting families. If the roles at home were equalized more so, child care and rearing at a young age, a woman would more likely be more sucessful in a science career... Regardless, there is an income gap because women are not found in certain careers, perhaps not totally because of societal precedent but still greatly affected by it...
trumptman seriously though, if you ever find a link or resource regarding the actual pay per hour style stats, please post a link here. i'd be very interested in reading through them.
Comments
as for
I'm sorry to wander so far off, but I just can't think of an area where women could ever compete as easily with men as tech and yet men are 90-95% of the people employed in it.
that probably has more to do with the fact that most woman can get laid any time they want to, and therefore aren't forced to spend countless hours in front of a computer screen. w/o this forced exile/learning, they're at a serious disadvantage when it comes to computing background.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
I have studied a bit of statistics and have always had an affinity for numbers but surely it is obvious to everyone that statisticians can account for confounding factors. In fact, to a great degree, that is all they do.
If these studies hadn't accounted for the obvious factors like age, education, job type etc. then other statisticians would have have taken the report to pieces and you would be able to provide a link to a source saying how wrong these figures are.
You are right except you have to consider the political climate. Ethnic and gender studies have rarely come under true scrutiny because it is hard to challenge someone on so sensitive a topic. I mean there still is the court of public opinion to consider. Being say, a white male and publishing a paper saying that claims of rape are fictitious about 60% of the time and that instead of 1 in every 4 women being raped it is more like 1 woman every 4 colleges would get you pure hell from the political hate police out there.
They would like say you are condoning rape, violence against women, etc.
You might be surprised how often certain things get repeated over and over again.
Lastly you consider same to mean same. The people publishing these types of reports don't. The phrase is quite clear, equal pay for equal work. It is intentional and if you do any searches on equal work equal pay and compartive work you will see what I am talking about. Most feminist organizations consider it repressive that plumbers earn more than secretaries and things like that. Since they don't want certain jobs, they would prefer to take the ones they do want and declare them comparable.
If you don't believe me look up the equal pay act of 1963. It is AGAINST THE LAW to pay someone a differente amount for the same work because of their gender. Comparative worth, is what they are arguing for.
Nick
Originally posted by alcimedes
actually more than anything else it all depends on what you use as qualifications, and what your assumptions are. who knows, maybe there are "standard" govt. rules regarding what is "full-time" and what isn't. in which case there'd be no reason to pick apart a study, because according to the rules, it's accurate.
that probably has more to do with the fact that most woman can get laid any time they want to, and therefore aren't forced to spend countless hours in front of a computer screen. w/o this forced exile/learning, they're at a serious disadvantage when it comes to computing background.
Oh the government considers full-time anything 32 hours or above. I just meant that if you worked 50 hours a week and I worked 32 hours, we would both be considered full-time. When I made 65% of what you did, it wouldn't be discrimination or repression. The government would classify us both the same though and say that you were paid 35% more than me.
As to the women and computers this is true, not desperately needing to get laid likely does play into it.
But in that instance, who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed?
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
You are right except you have to consider the political climate. Ethnic and gender studies have rarely come under true scrutiny because it is hard to challenge someone on so sensitive a topic. I mean there still is the court of public opinion to consider. Being say, a white male and publishing a paper saying that claims of rape are fictitious about 60% of the time and that instead of 1 in every 4 women being raped it is more like 1 woman every 4 colleges would get you pure hell from the political hate police out there.
They would like say you are condoning rape, violence against women, etc.
You might be surprised how often certain things get repeated over and over again.
Lastly you consider same to mean same. The people publishing these types of reports don't. The phrase is quite clear, equal pay for equal work. It is intentional and if you do any searches on equal work equal pay and compartive work you will see what I am talking about. Most feminist organizations consider it repressive that plumbers earn more than secretaries and things like that. Since they don't want certain jobs, they would prefer to take the ones they do want and declare them comparable.
If you don't believe me look up the equal pay act of 1963. It is AGAINST THE LAW to pay someone a differente amount for the same work because of their gender. Comparative worth, is what they are arguing for.
Nick
A couple of points. Rape is a touchy issue, but the numbers are not simply based on random claims. Still, for 1/30 males to have been raped is a very high percentage in my mind -- this is the one act that removes the self-will of the victim so much so at time i think it should be punished equally to murder, so regardless of whether the 1/4 or 1/3 numbers for women are accurate the fact remains it is a problem...
Secondly, the numbers for money earned are across the board numbers, not this career for that etc etc... What this means is that to some degree women are still systematically not found in many high paying jobs, for instance CEO's of large corporations or even in the management positions of corporations or even small liberal arts colleges etc. Still further is the unbalanced maternal expectations of women; to be a woman in science, for instance, is very hard given the expectations of these careers on time and location during the most likely time that people would be starting families. If the roles at home were equalized more so, child care and rearing at a young age, a woman would more likely be more sucessful in a science career... Regardless, there is an income gap because women are not found in certain careers, perhaps not totally because of societal precedent but still greatly affected by it...
just a completely random thought.
Originally posted by alcimedes
actually, i've routinely read that more men are raped every year than woman, but most groups don't count prison statistics.
just a completely random thought.
I have read that as well.
Nick
link 1
link 2
link 3
Nick