I disagree that the gap is solely because women make certain choices. There's proof that the gap exists for other reasons.
bull. where I work the women are paid MORE than the men and guess what, they DO less work. (IT field). they suck. and they have also complained that even though they suck, that if the business gets rid of them, they will complain that it was because they were women..(one already tried it, and FAILED).
bull. where I work the women are paid MORE than the men and guess what, they DO less work. (IT field). they suck. and they have also complained that even though they suck, that if the business gets rid of them, they will complain that it was because they were women..(one already tried it, and FAILED).
Bull? Your anecdote does nothing to disprove discrimination as one of the causes of the wage gap.
"However, debate exists whether these decisions are freely made or influenced by discrimination in society or in the workplace."
RTFA. "Choice" was the entire point of the selection.
Well the debate is by those who wish to press an agenda.
As I mentioned, choice = power. When you can choose to work part time, it means you don't HAVE to work.
Here are the wide array of choices offered to both (typically) when it comes to supporting your family.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work full time
Work full time
Then of course we could get into the man's choice of work full time or else the nice family court will toss your ass in jail, or even the don't quit your high paying job for something that might give you time with your children/make you safer or healthier or the court will find you in contempt for not making enough sort of choices.
Likewise it is amazing how you consider those factors, "freely made" when a man HAS to pretty much work full time with a family, yet they are "discrimination" when a woman has a choice to work, or stay at home. (and also still work, but the government doesn't seem to count that)
Oh and of course society never influences a man. I mean I hear about "deadbeat moms" all the time in the news since we expect so much of them financially.
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
Of course I would love to see the man punctuate that with "BTW if you come home and the house looks like crap, and it was a bad day with the kids, you better not utter a word and realize I worked hard all day while we were at the park,"
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Well the debate is by those who wish to press an agenda.
As I mentioned, choice = power. When you can choose to work part time, it means you don't HAVE to work.
Here are the wide array of choices offered to both (typically) when it comes to supporting your family.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work full time
Work full time
Then of course we could get into the man's choice of work full time or else the nice family court will toss your ass in jail, or even the don't quit your high paying job for something that might give you time with your children/make you safer or healthier or the court will find you in contempt for not making enough sort of choices.
Likewise it is amazing how you consider those factors, "freely made" when a man HAS to pretty much work full time with a family, yet they are "discrimination" when a woman has a choice to work, or stay at home. (and also still work, but the government doesn't seem to count that)
Oh and of course society never influences a man. I mean I hear about "deadbeat moms" all the time in the news since we expect so much of them financially.
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
Of course I would love to see the man punctuate that with "BTW if you come home and the house looks like crap, and it was a bad day with the kids, you better not utter a word and realize I worked hard all day while we were at the park,"
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Nick
Bogus. Absolutely Bogus.
The choices available for men and women are the same. They are: full time, part time, stay at home, and alternative work arrangements (discussed in detail in the GAO report I linked to). The question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." (66). And there is real debate about that.
Aside: You make it sound as if the wage gap is some picnic while real workers (men) are suffering.
This just shows, again, how little research you do for your posts.
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
[...]
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Why a man can't say that? Does it really take too much courage of you nick, if it's what you really want?
Envying being with kids, spending a day with them at disneyland etc, sounds that you two should probably swithc your roles. Maybe she should get some life, and you spend time with your kids.
At about the same time, the AFL-CIO and the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) released Equal Pay for Working Families: National and State Data on the Pay Gap and Its Costs. This report again propounded the fiction that women are paid only 74 cents on a man's dollar in the United States as a whole, and presented data for women's earnings in individual States. In Louisiana, women's earnings are supposedly 67 percent of men's, whereas in the District of Columbia women earn 97 percent of men's wages. In addition, the report looked at the percent of men and women working in different industries, and concluded that "America's working families lose a staggering $200 billion annually to the wage gap."
In Italy it'd be amazing if in any profession the wage gap is ONLY anything like those percentages.
Average: women get 60 % of mens salary, same job and same education.
And AFAIK even in Scandinavia, which many people adore for its "solidariety" has gaps .. so 75 % or less for women, I can't guarantee it beinf for Sweden but Finland for sure.
Solution? If you are born being of wrong sex .. sorry.
People who are taller get more money. That's been proven. So while the 74% figure might be wrong, the gap does exist. And that gap isn't caused by women making choices, but by men and women when hiring.
Yep. Most American presidents have been far taller the average men, and in really rare cases has the shorter candidate won.
And, in women this is partially valid. A woman gets _maybe_ paid more if she is taller. But if she is taller than her (male) employee, she gets paid less or loses job easier... I assume models and fashion business in general are exceptions to that.
Yes. that is pretty funny. Way to derail the thread. Sorry I've been up all night working on a term paper. Excuse me if I forgot for a moment what you had posted earlier. Bite me.
So you instead making your point clear just posted your research paper to the thread, and if people have any other information than what they have read of your post, they are obviously not reading.
Giaguara you have the innate talent to present your opinion as fact
however you havn't a single clue in some things if my opinion was fact...
the fact of the matter is ladies and germs... we're all oppressed. Men FEEL can't be with their kids, by societal roles, and women feel they can't do anything but make dinner with the food their men bring to them heh.
strange thing feminism, me being a son of a feminist vocalist. I'm sure she changed her opinion, when technically sex is just a technicality.
The sad thing is to me is that girls now are so empowered, to do so much from a young age, where as guys its all about how sick you are, to oppress your feelings, not be vocal about your ideas. Just look at the ad banners in this messageboard, at times. You don't see ad campaigns about teaching little girls to raise their kids right. Men are just losing their rights, as being a father, destined to only pay child support.
The choices available for men and women are the same. They are: full time, part time, stay at home, and alternative work arrangements (discussed in detail in the GAO report I linked to). The question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." (66). And there is real debate about that.
Aside: You make it sound as if the wage gap is some picnic while real workers (men) are suffering.
This just shows, again, how little research you do for your posts.
The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
You say the question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." But that question is loaded. The result is either a totally empowered woman or else a discriminated woman. When men are given less than a full choice it isn't considered discrimination that narrows their choices. When you decide to make more than I do as a lawyer, the question isn't framed as "discrimination or freedom of choice."
It is understood as purely choice. The fact that you change my gender doesn't change the outcome. The only reason the outcome changes is because women having a choice isn't enough for some feminist. They will only be satisfied when they have a system of privilege in place.
First I dispute much of the wage gap since you consider choice to be discrimination in many instances. You assume any gap is discrimination while presenting no evidence that compares apples to apples. (Experience, schooling, same job, same number of hours worked, etc.)
Likewise you assume that I consider full time work for a boss to be nirvanna, when I have made clear I consider it anything but that. If anything it is you, and many other men along with some women who are trying to impose a male model of achievement onto women. There are plenty of women and men who achieve and it isn't measured in a paycheck. That is about the most insulting premise coming from the child of two educators, I could imagine. Are you parents oppressed failures, held down by society because there isn't some dollar figure next to their names? Success is measured in more than dollars and work hours. The fact that more women see this is a sign of enlightenment, not oppression.
Why would how many hours you work and what you make be considered any sort of form of achievement? Most people consider the opposite a form of achievement, how long can you go without having to work, also know as retirement.
The debate is truly about what success should be defined as. Your report chooses one definition and then complains that women don't meet it, or might be influenced by society not to pursue it. The truly enlightened men and women, would question why that is the only definition of success.
besides nick - you really should not be married. that way you are not any more forced to work than the woman that is not your wife.
BS, I'll tell you what Gia, find me the percentage of women will to support a spouse who is incapable of earning what they do or even incapable of earning enough to support a family.
Society teaches daily that if a man doesn't earn, he isn't deserving of love. They teach this in family courts that call him deadbeat, or worse yet jail and threaten him for not being capable of earning a state mandated amount of money. This is seldom if ever even applied to women. A woman is never questioned in her capacity to parent because of her earning ability. If anything it is declared that society has to improve her ability to earn to enable her to support the children. How can a man have a choice of no work or part time work when a court will order him to earn an amount of money, provide health insurance, even pay alimony. How does he do that without a job Gia? You suggested it so you tell me. Society treats men as ATM machines and the only choice they have it to find a way to earn.
As for my being married, I am and have been for just about 9 years. I do work, but I also attempt to create investments and assets that will support both of us so BOTH of us will have the same choices regarding work. However the early fruits of this, process go to my wife. I don't consider that oppression. I don't resent it except for when backward idiots suggest that she is being oppressed by what is actually a sign of financial health and wealth.
Men FEEL can't be with their kids, by societal roles, and women feel they can't do anything but make dinner with the food their men bring to them heh.
The sad thing is to me is that girls now are so empowered, to do so much from a young age, where as guys its all about how sick you are, to oppress your feelings, not be vocal about your ideas. Just look at the ad banners in this messageboard, at times. You don't see ad campaigns about teaching little girls to raise their kids right. Men are just losing their rights, as being a father, destined to only pay child support.
At least you and some others realize it's you FEEL like you can't be with your kids. It does not mean it is the ultimate truth though. If you want changes in the life you have, start to do something differently in your own life. Want to spend more time with your kids? Do so, ignore what your neighbors might think about it. It's your life, it's your kids. (thought I would not say kids are of someone .. they are themselves, you jsut happen to be their parent)
Girls are empowered? How come I still see such a big gap in everything regarding kids? Toys are either cars, guns, war toys, action figures -- those are for males, or baby dolls, barbies, girly pinky fluffy cutie take-care-of plastic cuties -- for girls. Or maybe some things have finally changed, maybe the girls today don't have to hear things such as "girls don't do things like that" "you can't do that, you are a girl." For sure that change, whenever it comes/will come, starts person by person .. If you want a better future, re-educate you mind and your kids.
Now enough kid talk for tonite. Gonna see some region-2 coded movies now..
all I gotta say to that is... go buy some clothes in a department store look at the selection of male clothes from the corner looking out at the vast horizon of it female counterparts.
there is tumultuous amounts of psychological research data of what girls want. Girls have their own toy aisles and their own wants. I've done a lot of research in this for marketing/sales ends, and trust me girls hang out with girls. If a girl hangs out with the boys, she usually has brothers. Its just as simple as that.
Look at it from a demographic perspective... Neilson supposedly said awhile back and I also refute it myself that 4 out of 10 boys supposedly use pysch drugs for ADD, or some disorder, usually from bad disciplining. From a parent perspective its just that girls are so easy to raise and are natural nurturers, and here in america its ok if a woman speaks her mind in business matters because "she is a woman" however me being the average white joe, if I told what was on my mind, as some women around me it'd most assuredly cost me my career. Men die sooner, we are raised to attack problems physically and intensely, to speak our minds and sharing our feelings is unnatural to our being.
[B]The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
The choises are made while you live, while you have your relation, work, life etc. Not after, not when your marriage is over. You talk quite a lot about the divorce, nick, to be in such a happy marriage.
[B]BS, I'll tell you what Gia, find me the percentage of women will to support a spouse who is incapable of earning what they do or even incapable of earning enough to support a family.
You probably know most of my friends aren't married with kids, nick. But thinking about it - 2 good friends around here come to my mind very quickly. Both married, with kids, one has his wife as main income, working at Walgreeens, he works sometimes at a family restaurant, and they have 4 kids, and soon a 5th one (and the kids are never alone), and the other .. he takes as well care of kids as his main task. They chose different. And I think both are great dads as well.
Quote:
Society teaches daily that if a man doesn't earn, he isn't deserving of love. They teach this in family courts that call him deadbeat, or worse yet jail and threaten him for not being capable of earning a state mandated amount of money. This is seldom if ever even applied to women. A woman is never questioned in her capacity to parent because of her earning ability.
"Society teaches"? You were told. If you don't want to believe that any more, don't tell that to your kids.
Oh - how much is the state mandated amount of money a male has to earn exactly ?
Quote:
How can a man have a choice of no work or part time work when a court will order him to earn an amount of money, provide health insurance, even pay alimony. How does he do that without a job Gia? You suggested it so you tell me. Society treats men as ATM machines and the only choice they have it to find a way to earn.
nick, I think those who want to get married, have a nice family, kids and all that, should have a family, kids and all what they wanted. And stay married then. Those two of my friends who dedicate themselves to their family, I have never heard them talk about divorce with the same sentence of their actual life. They have better things to do.
The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
I'm guessing the man and the women, respectively, and that only reinforces my discrimination argument on another level.
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
You say the question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." But that question is loaded. The result is either a totally empowered woman or else a discriminated woman.
OK. I'm convinced you're making this up as you go along. I cited the question from a GAO report, not some 5th grade science paper link off the web. It's much harder to find obvious logical fallacies like "loaded questions" here. On that regard, you're completely wrong. A loaded question is like asking "do you still beat your wife" because it presupposes that you have a wife and you have beaten her. What am I presupposing here, trumptman? One would think it necessary for proving a loaded question. Advice: Please stick to language you know, and don't try to use fancy debate terms you definitely don't understand.
The question remains. It's the same question that both articles in Civil Rights Journal ask.
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
When men are given less than a full choice it isn't considered discrimination that narrows their choices. When you decide to make more than I do as a lawyer, the question isn't framed as "discrimination or freedom of choice."
What?
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
It is understood as purely choice. The fact that you change my gender doesn't change the outcome. The only reason the outcome changes is because women having a choice isn't enough for some feminist. They will only be satisfied when they have a system of privilege in place.
Purely choice? As opposed to what, "Unpure" choice? Are we talking bottled water or the wage gap? I don't understand what you're saying in this paragraph until the last two sentences, when you indict feminism's nonexistent goal of trying to establish a "system of privilege." Wrong. Feminism's goal is equality, which is why females having the same choices as men might not be enough. Remember, the debate is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination."
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
First I dispute much of the wage gap since you consider choice to be discrimination in many instances. You assume any gap is discrimination while presenting no evidence that compares apples to apples. (Experience, schooling, same job, same number of hours worked, etc.)
Likewise you assume that I consider full time work for a boss to be nirvanna, when I have made clear I consider it anything but that. If anything it is you, and many other men along with some women who are trying to impose a male model of achievement onto women. There are plenty of women and men who achieve and it isn't measured in a paycheck. That is about the most insulting premise coming from the child of two educators, I could imagine. Are you parents oppressed failures, held down by society because there isn't some dollar figure next to their names? Success is measured in more than dollars and work hours. The fact that more women see this is a sign of enlightenment, not oppression.
Why would how many hours you work and what you make be considered any sort of form of achievement? Most people consider the opposite a form of achievement, how long can you go without having to work, also know as retirement.
The debate is truly about what success should be defined as. Your report chooses one definition and then complains that women don't meet it, or might be influenced by society not to pursue it. The truly enlightened men and women, would question why that is the only definition of success.
Nick
Please.
You can believe that money is not the sole definition of success but still be pissed when women earn less than men with all other factors controlled. 'Truly enlightened' women should just accept the wage gap? Bullshit.
Comments
Originally posted by trumptman
You could also look at why women prefer and are given the "choice" of part time work in overwhelming numbers as well.
You mean I haven't already?
From the selection of the GAO report I posted:
"However, debate exists whether these decisions are freely made or influenced by discrimination in society or in the workplace."
RTFA.
Originally posted by bunge
BR, you don't comprehend.
I disagree that the gap is solely because women make certain choices. There's proof that the gap exists for other reasons.
bull. where I work the women are paid MORE than the men and guess what, they DO less work. (IT field). they suck. and they have also complained that even though they suck, that if the business gets rid of them, they will complain that it was because they were women..(one already tried it, and FAILED).
Originally posted by The General
bull. where I work the women are paid MORE than the men and guess what, they DO less work. (IT field). they suck. and they have also complained that even though they suck, that if the business gets rid of them, they will complain that it was because they were women..(one already tried it, and FAILED).
Bull? Your anecdote does nothing to disprove discrimination as one of the causes of the wage gap.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
You mean I haven't already?
From the selection of the GAO report I posted:
"However, debate exists whether these decisions are freely made or influenced by discrimination in society or in the workplace."
RTFA.
Well the debate is by those who wish to press an agenda.
As I mentioned, choice = power. When you can choose to work part time, it means you don't HAVE to work.
Here are the wide array of choices offered to both (typically) when it comes to supporting your family.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work full time
Work full time
Then of course we could get into the man's choice of work full time or else the nice family court will toss your ass in jail, or even the don't quit your high paying job for something that might give you time with your children/make you safer or healthier or the court will find you in contempt for not making enough sort of choices.
Likewise it is amazing how you consider those factors, "freely made" when a man HAS to pretty much work full time with a family, yet they are "discrimination" when a woman has a choice to work, or stay at home. (and also still work, but the government doesn't seem to count that)
Oh and of course society never influences a man. I mean I hear about "deadbeat moms" all the time in the news since we expect so much of them financially.
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
Of course I would love to see the man punctuate that with "BTW if you come home and the house looks like crap, and it was a bad day with the kids, you better not utter a word and realize I worked hard all day while we were at the park,"
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Well the debate is by those who wish to press an agenda.
As I mentioned, choice = power. When you can choose to work part time, it means you don't HAVE to work.
Here are the wide array of choices offered to both (typically) when it comes to supporting your family.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work full time
Work full time
Then of course we could get into the man's choice of work full time or else the nice family court will toss your ass in jail, or even the don't quit your high paying job for something that might give you time with your children/make you safer or healthier or the court will find you in contempt for not making enough sort of choices.
Likewise it is amazing how you consider those factors, "freely made" when a man HAS to pretty much work full time with a family, yet they are "discrimination" when a woman has a choice to work, or stay at home. (and also still work, but the government doesn't seem to count that)
Oh and of course society never influences a man. I mean I hear about "deadbeat moms" all the time in the news since we expect so much of them financially.
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
Of course I would love to see the man punctuate that with "BTW if you come home and the house looks like crap, and it was a bad day with the kids, you better not utter a word and realize I worked hard all day while we were at the park,"
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Nick
Bogus. Absolutely Bogus.
The choices available for men and women are the same. They are: full time, part time, stay at home, and alternative work arrangements (discussed in detail in the GAO report I linked to). The question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." (66). And there is real debate about that.
Aside: You make it sound as if the wage gap is some picnic while real workers (men) are suffering.
This just shows, again, how little research you do for your posts.
Originally posted by trumptman
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work full time
Work full time
BS.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
besides nick - you really should not be married. that way you are not any more forced to work than the woman that is not your wife.
Originally posted by trumptman
Again choice = power. Women have more than men in this regard. Very seldom can a man go up to a woman and say, "I've decided I would like to stay home, take care of the children, and pursue my career/interests part time or in a nonmonetary manner. It is your job to make this happen."
[...]
I feel so oppressive when my wife is at Disneyland, a museum, the park, etc. while I am at work. I'm sure she wants to be oppressed even more. I often express to her that she should become unoppressed and instead seek equity with me regarding work when the children are school age. So far she appears to desire to remain oppressed at home and send me off to my empowered job.
Why a man can't say that? Does it really take too much courage of you nick, if it's what you really want?
Envying being with kids, spending a day with them at disneyland etc, sounds that you two should probably swithc your roles. Maybe she should get some life, and you spend time with your kids.
At about the same time, the AFL-CIO and the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) released Equal Pay for Working Families: National and State Data on the Pay Gap and Its Costs. This report again propounded the fiction that women are paid only 74 cents on a man's dollar in the United States as a whole, and presented data for women's earnings in individual States. In Louisiana, women's earnings are supposedly 67 percent of men's, whereas in the District of Columbia women earn 97 percent of men's wages. In addition, the report looked at the percent of men and women working in different industries, and concluded that "America's working families lose a staggering $200 billion annually to the wage gap."
In Italy it'd be amazing if in any profession the wage gap is ONLY anything like those percentages.
Average: women get 60 % of mens salary, same job and same education.
And AFAIK even in Scandinavia, which many people adore for its "solidariety" has gaps .. so 75 % or less for women, I can't guarantee it beinf for Sweden but Finland for sure.
Solution? If you are born being of wrong sex .. sorry.
Originally posted by bunge
People who are taller get more money. That's been proven. So while the 74% figure might be wrong, the gap does exist. And that gap isn't caused by women making choices, but by men and women when hiring.
Yep. Most American presidents have been far taller the average men, and in really rare cases has the shorter candidate won.
And, in women this is partially valid. A woman gets _maybe_ paid more if she is taller. But if she is taller than her (male) employee, she gets paid less or loses job easier... I assume models and fashion business in general are exceptions to that.
Originally posted by BR
Yes. that is pretty funny. Way to derail the thread. Sorry I've been up all night working on a term paper. Excuse me if I forgot for a moment what you had posted earlier. Bite me.
So you instead making your point clear just posted your research paper to the thread, and if people have any other information than what they have read of your post, they are obviously not reading.
however you havn't a single clue in some things if my opinion was fact...
the fact of the matter is ladies and germs... we're all oppressed. Men FEEL can't be with their kids, by societal roles, and women feel they can't do anything but make dinner with the food their men bring to them heh.
strange thing feminism, me being a son of a feminist vocalist. I'm sure she changed her opinion, when technically sex is just a technicality.
The sad thing is to me is that girls now are so empowered, to do so much from a young age, where as guys its all about how sick you are, to oppress your feelings, not be vocal about your ideas. Just look at the ad banners in this messageboard, at times. You don't see ad campaigns about teaching little girls to raise their kids right. Men are just losing their rights, as being a father, destined to only pay child support.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Bogus. Absolutely Bogus.
The choices available for men and women are the same. They are: full time, part time, stay at home, and alternative work arrangements (discussed in detail in the GAO report I linked to). The question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." (66). And there is real debate about that.
Aside: You make it sound as if the wage gap is some picnic while real workers (men) are suffering.
This just shows, again, how little research you do for your posts.
The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
You say the question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." But that question is loaded. The result is either a totally empowered woman or else a discriminated woman. When men are given less than a full choice it isn't considered discrimination that narrows their choices. When you decide to make more than I do as a lawyer, the question isn't framed as "discrimination or freedom of choice."
It is understood as purely choice. The fact that you change my gender doesn't change the outcome. The only reason the outcome changes is because women having a choice isn't enough for some feminist. They will only be satisfied when they have a system of privilege in place.
First I dispute much of the wage gap since you consider choice to be discrimination in many instances. You assume any gap is discrimination while presenting no evidence that compares apples to apples. (Experience, schooling, same job, same number of hours worked, etc.)
Likewise you assume that I consider full time work for a boss to be nirvanna, when I have made clear I consider it anything but that. If anything it is you, and many other men along with some women who are trying to impose a male model of achievement onto women. There are plenty of women and men who achieve and it isn't measured in a paycheck. That is about the most insulting premise coming from the child of two educators, I could imagine. Are you parents oppressed failures, held down by society because there isn't some dollar figure next to their names? Success is measured in more than dollars and work hours. The fact that more women see this is a sign of enlightenment, not oppression.
Why would how many hours you work and what you make be considered any sort of form of achievement? Most people consider the opposite a form of achievement, how long can you go without having to work, also know as retirement.
The debate is truly about what success should be defined as. Your report chooses one definition and then complains that women don't meet it, or might be influenced by society not to pursue it. The truly enlightened men and women, would question why that is the only definition of success.
Nick
Originally posted by Giaguara
BS.
Woman's choice...
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
Men's choice
Work full time
Work part time
Stay at home
besides nick - you really should not be married. that way you are not any more forced to work than the woman that is not your wife.
BS, I'll tell you what Gia, find me the percentage of women will to support a spouse who is incapable of earning what they do or even incapable of earning enough to support a family.
Society teaches daily that if a man doesn't earn, he isn't deserving of love. They teach this in family courts that call him deadbeat, or worse yet jail and threaten him for not being capable of earning a state mandated amount of money. This is seldom if ever even applied to women. A woman is never questioned in her capacity to parent because of her earning ability. If anything it is declared that society has to improve her ability to earn to enable her to support the children. How can a man have a choice of no work or part time work when a court will order him to earn an amount of money, provide health insurance, even pay alimony. How does he do that without a job Gia? You suggested it so you tell me. Society treats men as ATM machines and the only choice they have it to find a way to earn.
As for my being married, I am and have been for just about 9 years. I do work, but I also attempt to create investments and assets that will support both of us so BOTH of us will have the same choices regarding work. However the early fruits of this, process go to my wife. I don't consider that oppression. I don't resent it except for when backward idiots suggest that she is being oppressed by what is actually a sign of financial health and wealth.
Nick
Originally posted by kraig911
Men FEEL can't be with their kids, by societal roles, and women feel they can't do anything but make dinner with the food their men bring to them heh.
The sad thing is to me is that girls now are so empowered, to do so much from a young age, where as guys its all about how sick you are, to oppress your feelings, not be vocal about your ideas. Just look at the ad banners in this messageboard, at times. You don't see ad campaigns about teaching little girls to raise their kids right. Men are just losing their rights, as being a father, destined to only pay child support.
At least you and some others realize it's you FEEL like you can't be with your kids. It does not mean it is the ultimate truth though. If you want changes in the life you have, start to do something differently in your own life. Want to spend more time with your kids? Do so, ignore what your neighbors might think about it. It's your life, it's your kids. (thought I would not say kids are of someone .. they are themselves, you jsut happen to be their parent)
Girls are empowered? How come I still see such a big gap in everything regarding kids? Toys are either cars, guns, war toys, action figures -- those are for males, or baby dolls, barbies, girly pinky fluffy cutie take-care-of plastic cuties -- for girls. Or maybe some things have finally changed, maybe the girls today don't have to hear things such as "girls don't do things like that" "you can't do that, you are a girl." For sure that change, whenever it comes/will come, starts person by person .. If you want a better future, re-educate you mind and your kids.
Now enough kid talk for tonite. Gonna see some region-2 coded movies now..
there is tumultuous amounts of psychological research data of what girls want. Girls have their own toy aisles and their own wants. I've done a lot of research in this for marketing/sales ends, and trust me girls hang out with girls. If a girl hangs out with the boys, she usually has brothers. Its just as simple as that.
Look at it from a demographic perspective... Neilson supposedly said awhile back and I also refute it myself that 4 out of 10 boys supposedly use pysch drugs for ADD, or some disorder, usually from bad disciplining. From a parent perspective its just that girls are so easy to raise and are natural nurturers, and here in america its ok if a woman speaks her mind in business matters because "she is a woman" however me being the average white joe, if I told what was on my mind, as some women around me it'd most assuredly cost me my career. Men die sooner, we are raised to attack problems physically and intensely, to speak our minds and sharing our feelings is unnatural to our being.
Originally posted by trumptman
[B]The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
The choises are made while you live, while you have your relation, work, life etc. Not after, not when your marriage is over. You talk quite a lot about the divorce, nick, to be in such a happy marriage.
Originally posted by trumptman
[B]BS, I'll tell you what Gia, find me the percentage of women will to support a spouse who is incapable of earning what they do or even incapable of earning enough to support a family.
You probably know most of my friends aren't married with kids, nick. But thinking about it - 2 good friends around here come to my mind very quickly. Both married, with kids, one has his wife as main income, working at Walgreeens, he works sometimes at a family restaurant, and they have 4 kids, and soon a 5th one (and the kids are never alone), and the other .. he takes as well care of kids as his main task. They chose different. And I think both are great dads as well.
Society teaches daily that if a man doesn't earn, he isn't deserving of love. They teach this in family courts that call him deadbeat, or worse yet jail and threaten him for not being capable of earning a state mandated amount of money. This is seldom if ever even applied to women. A woman is never questioned in her capacity to parent because of her earning ability.
"Society teaches"? You were told. If you don't want to believe that any more, don't tell that to your kids.
Oh - how much is the state mandated amount of money a male has to earn exactly ?
How can a man have a choice of no work or part time work when a court will order him to earn an amount of money, provide health insurance, even pay alimony. How does he do that without a job Gia? You suggested it so you tell me. Society treats men as ATM machines and the only choice they have it to find a way to earn.
nick, I think those who want to get married, have a nice family, kids and all that, should have a family, kids and all what they wanted. And stay married then. Those two of my friends who dedicate themselves to their family, I have never heard them talk about divorce with the same sentence of their actual life. They have better things to do.
yes, and i do shop for clothes in mens departments too. women's clothes have normally too large hips and bottom, they very rarely fit.
Originally posted by Giaguara
"Society teaches"? You were told. If you don't want to believe that any more, don't tell that to your kids.
Sorry to jump in here with this, but this is *PRECISELY* the advice that I tell my female friends when the subject of societal influences comes up.
It goes both ways, in so many damned respects.
Originally posted by trumptman
The choices are the same? Really, I would suggest you look into any research with regard to family courts, support and custody. You will see exactly who society supports to work and who it supports to care for the children.
I'm guessing the man and the women, respectively, and that only reinforces my discrimination argument on another level.
Originally posted by trumptman
You say the question is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination." But that question is loaded. The result is either a totally empowered woman or else a discriminated woman.
OK. I'm convinced you're making this up as you go along. I cited the question from a GAO report, not some 5th grade science paper link off the web. It's much harder to find obvious logical fallacies like "loaded questions" here. On that regard, you're completely wrong. A loaded question is like asking "do you still beat your wife" because it presupposes that you have a wife and you have beaten her. What am I presupposing here, trumptman? One would think it necessary for proving a loaded question. Advice: Please stick to language you know, and don't try to use fancy debate terms you definitely don't understand.
The question remains. It's the same question that both articles in Civil Rights Journal ask.
Originally posted by trumptman
When men are given less than a full choice it isn't considered discrimination that narrows their choices. When you decide to make more than I do as a lawyer, the question isn't framed as "discrimination or freedom of choice."
What?
Originally posted by trumptman
It is understood as purely choice. The fact that you change my gender doesn't change the outcome. The only reason the outcome changes is because women having a choice isn't enough for some feminist. They will only be satisfied when they have a system of privilege in place.
Purely choice? As opposed to what, "Unpure" choice? Are we talking bottled water or the wage gap? I don't understand what you're saying in this paragraph until the last two sentences, when you indict feminism's nonexistent goal of trying to establish a "system of privilege." Wrong. Feminism's goal is equality, which is why females having the same choices as men might not be enough. Remember, the debate is "whether decisions that women make to manage work and family responsibilities are freely made or influenced by underlying discrimination."
Originally posted by trumptman
First I dispute much of the wage gap since you consider choice to be discrimination in many instances. You assume any gap is discrimination while presenting no evidence that compares apples to apples. (Experience, schooling, same job, same number of hours worked, etc.)
Likewise you assume that I consider full time work for a boss to be nirvanna, when I have made clear I consider it anything but that. If anything it is you, and many other men along with some women who are trying to impose a male model of achievement onto women. There are plenty of women and men who achieve and it isn't measured in a paycheck. That is about the most insulting premise coming from the child of two educators, I could imagine. Are you parents oppressed failures, held down by society because there isn't some dollar figure next to their names? Success is measured in more than dollars and work hours. The fact that more women see this is a sign of enlightenment, not oppression.
Why would how many hours you work and what you make be considered any sort of form of achievement? Most people consider the opposite a form of achievement, how long can you go without having to work, also know as retirement.
The debate is truly about what success should be defined as. Your report chooses one definition and then complains that women don't meet it, or might be influenced by society not to pursue it. The truly enlightened men and women, would question why that is the only definition of success.
Nick
Please.
You can believe that money is not the sole definition of success but still be pissed when women earn less than men with all other factors controlled. 'Truly enlightened' women should just accept the wage gap? Bullshit.