 |
Sinfest
welcome to the fest
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dennis J. Squidbunny
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3585
Location: AUSTRALIA YOU FAKIR
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 3:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Guest wrote: | Well, it's a "random link" to do with the subject of the wage gap, you know, relevant to the subject being discussed. If your reading comprehension is higher than that of a toddler or someone who is mentally ill, you'd see the contention within that thread is not the wage gap is, and I quote, "women's fault for not negotiating enough." It's not saying that at all. Then again, I'm not expecting genius from the person who said men have total control over the media, internet and the spread of culture.
| Him wrote: | | read it. Yawned. |
Brilliant. |
Come on, man, don't blow a gasket for the millionth time. Take a fucking breath, don't take the bait, and try and have a fucking conversation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kenshiro
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Samsally wrote: | | I really don't have the time or energy to go into the detail it probably deserves, but I think it's awfully telling that the stereotypically 'feminine' jobs are the ones that pay less. Gosh. It's almost like that says something. |
You definitely have a point there. But one of the things I noticed was that the two biggest job fields that we saw on those feminine graphs were Education and Health, which as far as I know tend to generally come with some of the best benefits packages on the market. So it could be that statistically women tend to prefer jobs that compensate less with money and more with perks (epecially security-type perks, like automatic retirement savings, good health insurance for her & the family, or high job security). Or could it be a symbiosis, with job creators in those fields tending to offer better benefits packages as a result of market demand from workers? Maybe it's a bit of both. I'm definitely not denying that women tend to get subtly discouraged from becoming engineers or auto-mechanics, though (just as an example). I'm just not certain as to how wide-spread the problem is; it's difficult to quantify. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yinello
Joined: 10 May 2012
Posts: 1311
Location: Behind you
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Darqcyde wrote: | Congressman says abortions never necessary to save life of mother
| Quote: | Republican Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois said after his Thursday debate against Democratic rival Tammy Duckworth that abortions are never necessary to save a pregnant woman's life, because modern technology has eliminated the risks of childbearing.
Walsh was defending his position that abortion should be outlawed with no exceptions, which is also the Republican Party's official stance on the issue. "With modern technology and science, you can't find one instance" of a pregnant woman's life being at risk, he told reporters after the debate. "There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing." He added that "advances in science and technology" meant that abortion is never necessary for the health of a mother. |
|
Sometimes I wish most of the GOP would just walk off a cliff. By accident.
_________________
Sinfest Comments Bingo because we like Schadenfreude~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 10715
Location: hiding the decline.
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Him wrote: | | Snorri wrote: | | ShadowCell wrote: | yes, if my reading comprehension was higher i would able to read the words that are not there and magically divine from Guest what his point is
alas, i remain a mere mortal
is it really so hard for you to just say what your fucking point is? no insults. no whining. no sneering that your point is actually hidden somewhere in Comment #37895727529897915 and it's also written in Navajo and only visible in the light of the winter solstice if Mars, Neptune, and the Oort Cloud are all perfectly aligned and the blood of a live chicken has been sacrificed to the chaos gods and if you didn't find it then obviously you're an idiot. say what your point is. present a thesis statement. make a point. |
Well Him did attribute a point to Guest that was not made. So any beef with that is justified. |
In fairness, no point was made at all. I just assumed Guest posting it was tacit endorsement of the position therein. Of course now he denies that the link is making that point, but with the brilliant argument that I have reading comprehension of a mental patient.
|
Well the link is not making that point at all, so I can see why Guest would say that.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Samsally
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 5439
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kenshiro wrote: | | Samsally wrote: | | I really don't have the time or energy to go into the detail it probably deserves, but I think it's awfully telling that the stereotypically 'feminine' jobs are the ones that pay less. Gosh. It's almost like that says something. |
You definitely have a point there. But one of the things I noticed was that the two biggest job fields that we saw on those feminine graphs were Education and Health, which as far as I know tend to generally come with some of the best benefits packages on the market. So it could be that statistically women tend to prefer jobs that compensate less with money and more with perks (epecially security-type perks, like automatic retirement savings, good health insurance for her & the family, or high job security). Or could it be a symbiosis, with job creators in those fields tending to offer better benefits packages as a result of market demand from workers? Maybe it's a bit of both. I'm definitely not denying that women tend to get subtly discouraged from becoming engineers or auto-mechanics, though (just as an example). I'm just not certain as to how wide-spread the problem is; it's difficult to quantify. |
Education is supposed to have good benefits? My benefits are quite a bit better than at least one teacher I know (who has been a teacher for at least 8 years) and I work in neither Education nor Health.
We have a number, though. Women are still making $.77 on the dollar, yeah? Whether they're getting pushed into lower paying jobs because of stereotypical gender assumptions or legitimately getting paid less for doing the same work (which, interestingly, I have anecdotal evidence of that, too. The same teacher I was talking about used to work for the school as IT and moved to teaching when she was refused a raise she asked for. They then hired in a dude who was less qualified at her asking price.) The fact remains that -women are still getting paid less on average-.
Ultimately, it's still a big problem. We could go into the hows and the wherefores in more detail but the problem is obviously there. Assuming that 'women are more likely to want benefits over cash' is just lazy thinking when you already know women get pushed into lower paying jobs and that we live in a culture that assumes 'women's work' isn't worth paying as much for. In fact, that's it's whole can of worms right there. Why -is- Education and Health lower on the pay scale? That's kinda fucked up, last I checked those are two very important things.
Okay basically my rambling point is you don't get to handwave away such an enormous problem with "Well maybe women just want benefits more than they want higher paying jobs" because it's lazy and also making a huge generalized assumption of one gender is actually a bad thing to do.
_________________
Samsally the GrayAce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:30 pm Post subject: 77 cents to the dollar is a well known myth |
|
|
| Kenshiro wrote: | | Samsally wrote: | | I really don't have the time or energy to go into the detail it probably deserves, but I think it's awfully telling that the stereotypically 'feminine' jobs are the ones that pay less. Gosh. It's almost like that says something. |
You definitely have a point there. But one of the things I noticed was that the two biggest job fields that we saw on those feminine graphs were Education and Health, which as far as I know tend to generally come with some of the best benefits packages on the market. So it could be that statistically women tend to prefer jobs that compensate less with money and more with perks (epecially security-type perks, like automatic retirement savings, good health insurance for her & the family, or high job security). Or could it be a symbiosis, with job creators in those fields tending to offer better benefits packages as a result of market demand from workers? Maybe it's a bit of both. I'm definitely not denying that women tend to get subtly discouraged from becoming engineers or auto-mechanics, though (just as an example). I'm just not certain as to how wide-spread the problem is; it's difficult to quantify. |
Both of my sisters are engineers, and the numbers you guys are coming up with are complete bullshit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adyon
Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 1028
Location: Behind my Cintiq
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the wage gap has a little bit of all that's been said.
1. There is a large factor that has a lot to do with simple choice of lifestyle. I know it's there. My wife has seen it with her fellow female Doctoral classmates even. Some of that is factored by social conditioning and some of it is likely genetics in there too I'm sure. But even with genetics, conditioning plays a lot bigger factor than people like to think.
2. In negotiating, like the link posted by Guest, it's true that women are not as demanding about pay like that as men are. I don't know if that's social conditioning towards women while growing up or just the difference of egotistical testosterone driven behavior that causes men to act that way. If it's that latter, it would make sense that when a man is doing the hiring, they say a very low price, knowing those going to be hired will obviously ask for a ton more than you started with.
3. In employment, many employers don't give promotions and such to women, because they just ASSUME women will eventually take time off to have a baby.
4. Sometimes women really do just do get paid less. It's not as common practice as it once was, but it really does still happens.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kenshiro
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Samsally wrote: | | (A lot of stuff.) |
Okay okay, whoa! I get it, you made your point. My apologies.
I didn't mean to imply that there wasn't a problem, and I'm sorry if I did; there obviously is. I just am at a bit of a loss about what can be done about it. It's actually a pretty complex dilemma when you start digging into it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 8883
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"glass ceilings" for all minorities remains the most pervasive problem, especially for the handicapped, and employment opportunities for women remains a problem, and I sure can't wait to have people tell women otherwise
anyway
rape victim told not to report an alleged rape, drops out while her alleged rapist graduates
http://www.alternet.org/college-rape-survivor-told-not-report-her-rapist-drops-out-while-alleged-rapist-graduates-honors#.UIPvUX0J8Zc.facebook
And here is the essay she wrote about the whole thing.
http://amherststudent.amherst.edu/?q=article%2F2012%2F10%2F17%2Faccount-sexual-assault-amherst-college
| Quote: | In short I was told: No you can’t change dorms, there are too many students right now. Pressing charges would be useless, he’s about to graduate, there’s not much we can do. Are you SURE it was rape? It might have just been a bad hookup…You should forgive and forget.
How are you supposed to forget the worst night of your life?… I was continuously told that I had to forgive him, that I was crazy for being scared on campus, and that there was nothing that could be done. They told me: We can report your rape as a statistic, you know for records, but I don’t recommend that you go through a disciplinary hearing. It would be you, a faculty advisor of your choice, him, and a faculty advisor of his choice in a room where you would be trying to prove that he raped you. You have no physical evidence, it wouldn’t get you very far to do this. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Just ask the liberals at Amherst college. They were the ones denying her rape claims. |
Half of the comments on that article belong in the "Socrates was a Christian" thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:07 am Post subject: Re: 77 cents to the dollar is a well known myth |
|
|
| Thy Brilliance wrote: | | Kenshiro wrote: | | Samsally wrote: | | I really don't have the time or energy to go into the detail it probably deserves, but I think it's awfully telling that the stereotypically 'feminine' jobs are the ones that pay less. Gosh. It's almost like that says something. |
You definitely have a point there. But one of the things I noticed was that the two biggest job fields that we saw on those feminine graphs were Education and Health, which as far as I know tend to generally come with some of the best benefits packages on the market. So it could be that statistically women tend to prefer jobs that compensate less with money and more with perks (epecially security-type perks, like automatic retirement savings, good health insurance for her & the family, or high job security). Or could it be a symbiosis, with job creators in those fields tending to offer better benefits packages as a result of market demand from workers? Maybe it's a bit of both. I'm definitely not denying that women tend to get subtly discouraged from becoming engineers or auto-mechanics, though (just as an example). I'm just not certain as to how wide-spread the problem is; it's difficult to quantify. |
Both of my sisters are engineers, and the numbers you guys are coming up with are complete bullshit. |
just wondering how you guys come up with these numbers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouse
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 15622
Location: under the bed
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
you realize that the stuff you quoted doesn't include any numbers? what numbers are you talking about? are you talking about numbers from something Kenshiro linked a while back? wouldn't the place to look for the source of those numbers be, oh, i don't know - maybe Kenshiro's link?
oh wait - you mention the $0.77 to $1.00 thing. well, let's see what your link says in the very first paragraph
| Quote: | In 2010, women who were full-time wage and salary workers
had median weekly earnings of $669. Women earned
81 percent of the median weekly earnings of their male
counterparts ($824). In 1979, the first year for which comparable
earnings data are available, women earned 62 percent of what
men earned. The women's-to-men's earnings ratio has been in the
80 to 81 percent range since 2004; prior to this time, the ratio had
been gradually trending upward. |
ladies, we can stop worrying! we aren't making only 77 cents for every dollar a man does - we make an entire 81 cents! and it's been stagnant for nearly a decade! what on _earth_ are we thinking, to complain about that?
_________________
aka: neverscared! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr Gary
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 6166
Location: Some pub in England
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In this thread bitches be givin' their four cents, yo.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouse
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 15622
Location: under the bed
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thy Brilliance
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3251
Location: Relative
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:12 am Post subject: importance of doing your own investigation is understated |
|
|
| mouse wrote: | you realize that the stuff you quoted doesn't include any numbers? what numbers are you talking about? are you talking about numbers from something Kenshiro linked a while back? wouldn't the place to look for the source of those numbers be, oh, i don't know - maybe Kenshiro's link?
oh wait - you mention the $0.77 to $1.00 thing. well, let's see what your link says in the very first paragraph
| Quote: | In 2010, women who were full-time wage and salary workers
had median weekly earnings of $669. Women earned
81 percent of the median weekly earnings of their male
counterparts ($824). In 1979, the first year for which comparable
earnings data are available, women earned 62 percent of what
men earned. The women's-to-men's earnings ratio has been in the
80 to 81 percent range since 2004; prior to this time, the ratio had
been gradually trending upward. |
ladies, we can stop worrying! we aren't making only 77 cents for every dollar a man does - we make an entire 81 cents! and it's been stagnant for nearly a decade! what on _earth_ are we thinking, to complain about that? |
I was merely quibbling over use of the most current number and fact checking for the sake of fact checking.
Relax mouse, you can still complain if you want to.
PS: My sister gets the same wages as her male coworkers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
