User Tag List

First 71516171819 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 263

  1. #161
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Wait, males can get pregnant now?

    US business culture isn't anti-woman, it's anti-family. It is ironic given how conservatives claim to be pro-family yet they support businesses doing everything in their power to disrupt family life under the guise of the free market. They clearly don't understand or appreciate the "race to the bottom" when it comes to wages and benefits.
    Some employment provides men with paternity leave. Just like there are women who can have maternity leave for adopting a baby, a man can stay home with the infant without having a pregnancy. Pregnancy does not take women off the job market for nine months, but usually just towards the last month. The difference in effect on employment is more socially engineered than biologically.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  2. #162
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    Some employment provides men with paternity leave. Just like there are women who can have maternity leave for adopting a baby, a man can stay home with the infant without having a pregnancy. Pregnancy does not take women off the job market for nine months, but usually just towards the last month. The difference in effect on employment is more socially engineered than biologically.
    There is no federally mandated paid maternity or paternity leave in the US. If conservatives were really pro-family they would support federally mandated paid leave. Hell, even Pakistan gets 12 weeks.

    I know pregnancy does not take women off the job market for 9 months, but losing any time is detrimental. Couple that with the sorry state of daycare in the US.

    Edit: I know I've been ragging on conservatives here, but they're not really the problem. It's big business that is lobbying Congress against these rules. Big business isn't really sexist, it cares only about money.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  3. #163
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I never claimed the highlighted. I mentioned the idea of asymptotic progress, but nothing about how close to that asymptote we have come.
    "LAST FEW POUNDS"!
    Christ. Back-pedlars.

    The line is much more erratic than you propose. I guess if you're simply mapping the gender pay gap, you might be right. Who can say? Given that none if us have an infinity within which to speculate.
    I am more interested in broader trends.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    It isn't sexist to pay someone less because they dropped out of the job market.
    It is. According to your own argument:
    evolution is sexist.
    If evolution has dictated our roles, and evolution is sexist, it can ONLY be sexist to adopt policies which support those arbitrary roles.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  4. #164
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    It is. According to your own argument:

    If evolution has dictated our roles, and evolution is sexist, it can ONLY be sexist to adopt policies which support those arbitrary roles.
    My statement was clearly facetious, but that is the type of claim a feminist would make so I can understand why you would take it seriously. Evolution is not conscious, therefore it is not capable of being sexist. You cannot accuse it of being sexist any more than you can accuse ultraviolet radiation of being racist. It is simply a force of nature.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #165
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Only if the average girl commits to a career, or at least to consistent employment, and doesn't drop out of the job market for significant periods, or go on a "mommy track", or settle for part time/underemployment, or accept the other kinds of disruptions and devaluations that bring down the lifetime earnings of many women.
    More of them are committing to college than men.

    More of them are employed out of college than men.

    How this doesn't translate to higher average pay escapes me.

    The pressures you mentioned aren't keeping them from outpacing men in every category.

    From the bureau of labor statistics: COLLEGE ENROLLMENT AND WORK ACTIVITY OF 2011 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES

    The numbers, it would seem, conflict with your assertion.

  6. #166
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    More of them are committing to college than men.

    More of them are employed out of college than men.

    How this doesn't translate to higher average pay escapes me.

    The pressures you mentioned aren't keeping them from outpacing men in every category.

    From the bureau of labor statistics: COLLEGE ENROLLMENT AND WORK ACTIVITY OF 2011 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES

    The numbers, it would seem, conflict with your assertion.
    It's escaping you because you're assuming that the post-college career paths are identical for men and women on average - in terms of promotions, job titles, pay, etc. This is not just an unsupported assumption - it is actually well-known to be false. And there is no evidence that the situation is improving, either.

    As a very basic example which comes to mind (one of many many studies out there, if you search), here is a recent study from a very reputable journal showing that when new science grads applied to jobs with identical applications other than male/female names, the men's applications were better rated, offered more opportunities, and offered significantly higher salaries (which can dramatically alter lifetime salary, since raises are often a percentage of current salary). Again, literally identical applications, no negotiation, no interview, applying to identical jobs, etc.

    This is not even close to being unusual, unfortunately.
    -end of thread-

  7. #167
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    It's escaping you because you're assuming that the post-college career paths are identical for men and women on average - in terms of promotions, job titles, pay, etc. This is not just an unsupported assumption - it is actually well-known to be false. And there is no evidence that the situation is improving, either.
    That's certainly true for older generations.

    I'm arguing about people born on or after '85.

    While pursuing motherhood is something men don't choose, trends among young people are flipping the old model on its head.

    When you take into consideration all the folks who grew up in the old model, it will take decades for the balance to shift.

    For recent graduates and students, it has already shifted.

  8. #168
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    That's certainly true for older generations.

    I'm arguing about people born on or after '85.

    While pursuing motherhood is something men don't choose, trends among young people are flipping the old model on its head.

    When you take into consideration all the folks who grew up in the old model, it will take decades for the balance to shift.

    For recent graduates and students, it has already shifted.
    I hate to break it to you but the study I quoted describes post-docs who were entering the job market in 2010-2012. These people would have been born in 1980-1986 or so, depending how long their PhD training took. It is clear evidence that discrimination is occuring today, not just 20 years ago.

    edit: of course, you can speculate all you like about how "the future will be totally different" but without evidence showing that the trend is actually changing (and evidence showing the opposite, in fact), it's not exactly....convincing. In order for the future to be better, the present must be changing, and there is little evidence to support that hypothesis.

    edit2: whoops, I was thinking of a different study - these aren't post-docs, they're undergraduate students, meaning that many of them were certainly born after 1985. I was born in 86 and graduated from undergrad in 2009.
    -end of thread-

  9. #169
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    I hate to break it to you but the study I quoted describes post-docs who were entering the job market in 2010-2012. These people would have been born in 1980-1988 or so, depending how long their PhD training took. It is clear evidence that discrimination is occuring today, not just 20 years ago.
    It doesn't matter if they are getting 15 resumes from females for every 10 they get from males, especially if that is occurring across different industries.

    The trends I'm referencing are larger and operate across all industries, not just science.

    I wonder if female applications are preferred to males in say, nursing or any number of other fields.

    It's easy to cherry pick the science field which has been dominated by men forever. Is there data showing that the study you mentioned applies across employment generally?

  10. #170
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    It doesn't matter if they are getting 15 resumes from females for every 10 they get from males, especially if that is occurring across different industries.

    The trends I'm referencing are larger and operate across all industries, not just science.

    I wonder if female applications are preferred to males in say, nursing or any number of other fields.

    It's easy to cherry pick the science field which has been dominated by men forever. Is there data showing that the study you mentioned applies across employment generally?
    Yes. Go do your own research. You're the one making (unlikely and unsupported) assumptions here, not me. As I mentioned, that was one example that I happened to be familiar with - I'm not doing a comprehensive lit review for you just because you can't be bothered to research the facts yourself.
    -end of thread-

Similar Threads

  1. Guns ARE equal rights.
    By SpankyMcFly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 294
    Last Post: 06-28-2016, 10:08 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-11-2013, 11:20 PM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-13-2011, 03:32 PM
  4. Catholic ban on women priests 'illegal under Harriet Harman equality bill'
    By Sniffles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 01-14-2010, 06:59 AM
  5. UK Lesbians Given Equal Birth Rights
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-01-2009, 04:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO