User Tag List

First 1060100108109110111112120160 Last

Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1614

  1. #1091
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    You may not agree that women are in a situation like that, but you have to understand that if one does accept that premise, the logic of the fairness of it follows, and so a lack of logic or not thinking about fairness isn't the problem at that point.
    Questions of fairness don't rest on logic, but on values. You can lay down an irrefutable layer of logic, but at best any such logic begs the question.

    My point (which wasn't to you, really) was that similar logic on the men's rights side of things is just as tendentious and pointless. The debate is about what is fair. You'll notice that in prior posts I've specifically argued against the OP, and instead I'm trying to point out what a lot of people appear to be really debating underneath the hyperbole. I'm not saying I'm not biased. I definitely have some opinions on the matter, but my opinions are outside the context of the hyperbole. I've no dog in the MRA/feminism debate. My (biased) position is, "look over here, this is what I think people are really complaining about, but it's not getting addressed because each side is ignoring the other."

    Wow. If you hadn't pointed that out, no one would have noticed that was going on in the article. Good work. Very astute.

    It's kind of the explicit frame of the thing. It still had points that I thought were worth reading. It actually had points even you or Jarlaxle could work with unironically.
    Not really. It's high-order navel gazing.

    So for you to read it that way almost suggests that as long as I present an MRA being as flawed as a mediocre human being, I'm skewing their image in a negative light...
    Um, yes? What else would be the point of such a portrait? The point is clearly not to learn about the person, but to judge him.

    ...In a thread were it's fair to represent all of feminism with the most radical minority.
    I'm explicitly not doing that.

    So in summary, our concern should be radical feminists who, in spite of being so common and so central to feminist ideology, can't be bothered to show up, not a one of them, in a lengthy thread that ought to just be egging them into participating. This is an honest objective! Unlike focusing on the kind of imaginary opponents to moderate feminism who are straw men that never really existed. And by never existed, I mean populate this thread.
    Actually, I don't think our concern should be radical feminists, per se. While they provide a rhetorical foil, it mostly results in straw man arguments. About the only thing in that sphere that should be confronted are the attempts to normalize ideas such as "rape culture": there's another thread where quite normal feminists insist that there is indeed a rape culture (labeling even minor examples of bad behavior as "part of the rape culture"), and perfectly fine with characterizing all men as potential rapists.

    I believe the concern should be about what is fair for men under the current legal climate and how we might preserve marriage and family in this same climate. Why preserve it? For reasons I stated earlier: marriage and family is a huge source of social and material capital that helps keep people out of poverty.


    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Also, I don't I've ever spoken to a feminist who wouldn't see the problem with a 15 year old male who was statutorily raped be held responsible for child support payments to his 34 year-old female rapist.
    That's the point.

    No MRA is in favor of paying women 77% of what men are paid for the same work, but wow that doesn't stop posturing politicians from pulling it out every few years.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes SD45T-2 liked this post

  2. #1092
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    Gone
    Posts
    9,841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Questions of fairness don't rest on logic, but on values. You can lay down an irrefutable layer of logic, but at best any such logic begs the question.

    My point (which wasn't to you, really) was that similar logic on the men's rights side of things is just as tendentious and pointless. The debate is about what is fair. You'll notice that in prior posts I've specifically argued against the OP, and instead I'm trying to point out what a lot of people appear to be really debating underneath the hyperbole. I'm not saying I'm not biased. I definitely have some opinions on the matter, but my opinions are outside the context of the hyperbole. I've no dog in the MRA/feminism debate. My (biased) position is, "look over here, this is what I think people are really complaining about, but it's not getting addressed because each side is ignoring the other."


    Not really. It's high-order navel gazing.


    Um, yes? What else would be the point of such a portrait? The point is clearly not to learn about the person, but to judge him.


    I'm explicitly not doing that.



    Actually, I don't think our concern should be radical feminists, per se. While they provide a rhetorical foil, it mostly results in straw man arguments. About the only thing in that sphere that should be confronted are the attempts to normalize ideas such as "rape culture": there's another thread where quite normal feminists insist that there is indeed a rape culture (labeling even minor examples of bad behavior as "part of the rape culture"), and perfectly fine with characterizing all men as potential rapists.

    I believe the concern should be about what is fair for men under the current legal climate and how we might preserve marriage and family in this same climate. Why preserve it? For reasons I stated earlier: marriage and family is a huge source of social and material capital that helps keep people out of poverty.




    That's the point.

    No MRA is in favor of paying women 77% of what men are paid for the same work, but wow that doesn't stop posturing politicians from pulling it out every few years.
    People don't really know how to use logic, that's why logic doesn't apply. When it comes to a debate logic becomes one sided and you try to poke holes in each others logic to make one side MORE logical then the other. I pray that one day people will use logic for what it is actually meant to be used for, creating a huge structure that is not twisted, distorted, and pidgeon holed to prove a point, but where we base things on logic itself. People use logic itself as a means to an end, it doesn't mean they are logical, it means they use logic for a purpose. This is different then say a scientist that is trying to actual piece together and utilize logic based on everything that is unearthed.

    You know, that is why I really enjoy talking to my dad, because he does not utilize purpose driven logic, logic is meant to understand and figure something out, not to prove a point. Logic is not used to determine I am right and you are wrong, its passed back and forth and we poke wholes in each others logic because we have the common goal of trying to find the best way to accomplish something. Not because we have already decided what the best way is and we are trying to convince others of it.

    My rant about logic and debates. I cant stand debates because its Me against You, I prefer discussions where there is openness and we actually work together to find holes in logic and pieces things together.
    Im out, its been fun
    Likes gromit, Lethe liked this post

  3. #1093
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post


    That's the point.

    No MRA is in favor of paying women 77% of what men are paid for the same work, but wow that doesn't stop posturing politicians from pulling it out every few years.
    That's because this statistic has been debunked a million times.




  4. #1094
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    That's because this statistic has been debunked a million times.
    Um, wouldn't the debunking make them NOT use it? My point is that it doesn't matter how true it is, but that it sounds unfair, which is why they use it.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  5. #1095
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Um, wouldn't the debunking make them NOT use it? My point is that it doesn't matter how true it is, but that it sounds unfair, which is why they use it.
    My guess is that either politicians are misinformed about current statistics and findings or that they want to pander towards women to get their vote. I'm quite certain it's a little bit a both. Notice all the women behind him.

  6. #1096
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    That's because this statistic has been debunked a million times.



    This is why The Wage Gap needs to be debunked every time it comes up: Availability cascade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    "An availability cascade is a self-reinforcing cycle that explains the development of certain kinds of collective beliefs. A novel idea or insight, usually one that seems to explain a complex process in a simple or straightforward manner, gains rapid currency in the popular discourse by its very simplicity and by its apparent insightfulness. Its rising popularity triggers a chain reaction within the social network: individuals adopt the new insight because other people within the network have adopted it, and on its face it seems plausible. The reason for this increased use and popularity of the new idea involves both the availability of the previously obscure term or idea, and the need of individuals using the term or idea to appear to be current with the stated beliefs and ideas of others, regardless of whether they in fact fully believe in the idea that they are expressing. Their need for social acceptance, and the apparent sophistication of the new insight, overwhelm their critical thinking."

    Cognitive overload and/or an unwillingness to invest time/money/effort into looking into the matter more critically themselves.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #1097
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    16,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Um, wouldn't the debunking make them NOT use it? My point is that it doesn't matter how true it is, but that it sounds unfair, which is why they use it.
    It sounds unfair, and when you dig into it, you find things that really are unfair. The $0.77/$1.00 claim is an oversimplification that masks the real issues, including one about which jix is actually correct. When it comes to equal rights, women can be their own worst enemies.

    More later - need to run to dinner and a concert.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  8. #1098
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    It sounds unfair, and when you dig into it, you find things that really are unfair. The $0.77/$1.00 claim is an oversimplification that masks the real issues, including one about which jix is actually correct. When it comes to equal rights, women can be their own worst enemies.

    More later - need to run to dinner and a concert.
    Given that the biggest portion of the wage gap shows itself after marriage, wouldn't supporting joint physical custody and a fair division of parental time in divorce laws (Marriage) & common law (Cohabitation) not only improve the welfare of the children (Source: BMC Public health journal), but put more single fathers in position where they need flexible hours & time off to take care of their children (As they do in your workplace), reduce the amount of child support which means there is less of a need to sacrifice family time and & free time for overtime, give single mothers more time to work and opportunities to better finance their children (Or, they view children as tools with which to squeeze the father's livelihood and continue to secure his income for themselves to get back at their husbands; but let's assume the best for now), and as you yourself said, increase pressure on women working in the same environment to take some of the remaining workload and get more over time for both married and unmarried women. And those are only the immediate effects. Even if all it does is improve the parental time distribution for fathers after a divorce or breakup (Which - in the case of the increasing trend of cohabitation - seems to be a statistically significant population), over a generation we will likely see more boys who got to spent more time with their fathers and would have a better appreciation for what they think of as the father's role once they might become fathers themselves, increasing their expectations of themselves and their own involvement even without a divorce or a breakup, enabling more married/cohabitant mothers to take more time for work, potentially even creating more men who don't have a problem associating nurture and masculinity and becoming more open minded to fields currently considered pink collar, and daughters spending more time with their fathers might in turn be more likely to view what their fathers currently do as a role model to go by, get more interested in what their fathers are interested in, and choose their careers accordingly. All these combined might not eliminate the gap when counted in total, but at the very least reduce it substantially.

    Everyone wins. How was the concert?

  9. #1099
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    16,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Given that the biggest portion of the wage gap shows itself after marriage, wouldn't supporting joint physical custody and a fair division of parental time in divorce laws (Marriage) & common law (Cohabitation) not only improve the welfare of the children (Source: BMC Public health journal), but put more single fathers in position where they need flexible hours & time off to take care of their children (As they do in your workplace), reduce the amount of child support which means there is less of a need to sacrifice family time and & free time for overtime, give single mothers more time to work and opportunities to better finance their children (Or, they view children as tools with which to squeeze the father's livelihood and continue to secure his income for themselves to get back at their husbands; but let's assume the best for now), and as you yourself said, increase pressure on women working in the same environment to take some of the remaining workload and get more over time for both married and unmarried women. And those are only the immediate effects. Even if all it does is improve the parental time distribution for fathers after a divorce or breakup (Which - in the case of the increasing trend of cohabitation - seems to be a statistically significant population), over a generation we will likely see more boys who got to spent more time with their fathers and would have a better appreciation for what they think of as the father's role once they might become fathers themselves, increasing their expectations of themselves and their own involvement even without a divorce or a breakup, enabling more married/cohabitant mothers to take more time for work, potentially even creating more men who don't have a problem associating nurture and masculinity and becoming more open minded to fields currently considered pink collar, and daughters spending more time with their fathers might in turn be more likely to view what their fathers currently do as a role model to go by, get more interested in what their fathers are interested in, and choose their careers accordingly. All these combined might not eliminate the gap when counted in total, but at the very least reduce it substantially.

    Everyone wins. How was the concert?
    Absolutely fantastic, but turned into a late night, followed by a very early morning.

    Joint physical custody should be the ideal when circumstances don't argue against it.

    As for the wage gap in general. It is certainly real in the sense that the average salary earned by women working full time is significantly less than that earned by men working full time. The discrepancy has (at least) three components.

    1. Women being paid less than men for doing the same work in the same conditions (quality of work, experience, education, etc.) There is much less of this than there used to be, though it is not eliminated, and I suspect it is a minor factor in the overall gap.

    2. Women being paid less than men in the same job due to having less experience. This reflects the fact that women are more likely to interrupt or delay careers to care for children, or take part time work for the same reason. This probably accounts for a larger share of the gap.

    3. Women are not seeking out the most lucrative jobs and careers. I suspect this is by far the greatest contribution to the wage gap. Women settle for lower paying jobs in the service industry, or office work, etc. There are many reasons for this, including: putting family responsibilities over investing in a career; growing up with the mindset/example that women don't go into these careers; being actively steered away from these careers or toward others more traditionally suitable for women; being judged or excluded socially for pursuing "nerdy" subjects; and finally, actual discrimination when it comes to hiring, promotion, or even getting the required education/training.

    The factors listed under (3) are mostly improving, but I'm not sure even today's young women realize this. They are going to college and grad school and are entering the workforce in record numbers, but still avoiding certain fields and career paths. Some suggest this is because women actually prefer other careers and fields (the ones that "happen" to pay less). I find it hard to imagine that any subset of humanity is so monolithic as to exhibit such an innate preference. IME, it reflects that there still is the sense that "there aren't alot of women in that field; it's hard to get into; you won't be well-received" etc.

    Having been in a predominantly male academic field and profession my entire life, all I can say is there are very few barriers that aren't surmountable with a reasonable amount of effort and persistence. But then in these kinds of careers, men must put out effort to succeed as well.

    Bottom line: women can't complain about the wage gap when they are unwilling to get the same experience and background as their male colleagues, and go for the same jobs. This is what jixmixfix is right about: you can't win if you don't play, and all too often, women still just sit on the sidelines and cheer the men on.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #1100
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,716

    Default

    Here's a fairly succinct appraisal of the overall wage gap situation:
    The Disappearing Gender Wage Gap | NCPA

    The main takeaway is that about 3.3 cents on the dollar is "unexplained", i.e., could conceivably be gender bias/discrimination but could also just be noise in the data or lack of accounting for other legitimate factors not conceived by the authors. About 5.5 cents is due to career choice. The largest single factor is "difference in experience" (not education, which is accounted for and rather slim at 0.4 cents on the dollar).

    Interestingly, there is this tidbit:
    In fact, the unadjusted average hourly wage in 2000 of single women who have never had a child was 7.9 percent greater than that of their male counterparts.
    That indicates that it is predominantly typical life choices that cause the gap, and not going the marriage/children route not only erases the "gap" but flips the sign the other way around.

    But there are still otherwise perfectly rational women who will assert that if they were male, doing the same job, they'd be making about 30% more than they currently make. No employer would ever be able to justify such a policy of disparity: if it were true, they'd have to fire all the men and only hire women, cuz they work 25% cheaper! I'm not saying there is absolutely no disparity in hiring practices (I think there is, for other reasons), but economically speaking, there's no way there is a real 25-30% gap in pay for the "same work".
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes SD45T-2, Rasofy, Mane liked this post

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • :hi:
  • :bye:
  • :)
  • :hug:
  • :happy2:
  • :smile:
  • :wubbie:
  • :D
  • :wink:
  • ;)
  • :newwink:
  • :(
  • :cry:
  • :mad:
  • :dry:
  • :doh:
  • :shock:
  • :huh:
  • :shrug:
  • :blush:

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

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