| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not while jobs are considered " women's work" that require equal levels of skills and training are paid less than jobs that are considered "men's work".
For example Teachers and Nurses are often paid considerably less than Electricans and Mechanics..... All of those jobs are important and they all require a comparable level of training.
In Australia it is illegal to pay anybody less for doing the same job based on race or gender (apprentices/juniors get shafted though due to age).
|
True, but that has nothing to do wiith the proletariat vs burgious. And, as far as I know, men nurses don't get paid more then women nurses.
I was actually under the impression the it was illegal here in the US, since that would be discrimination (based on gender, color, religion, and several others) which I know is illegal.
|
|
The only time I know of that discrimination is legal, is in conducting surveys for statical research, or giving preference to veterans and/or the disabled.
And don't take the surveys very seriously, about 10% of the surveys turned in are fake due to inability to get the target group to fill them out. Used to work for a survey company, people get paid to take surveys and they still say no or even funnier "I don't want what you're sellin'!" I still remember that lady, though I think she was having a bad day.
True, but that has nothing to do wiith the proletariat vs burgious. And, as far as I know, men nurses don't get paid more then women nurses.
I was actually under the impression the it was illegal here in the US, since that would be discrimination (based on gender, color, religion, and several others) which I know is illegal.
Incorrect.
Discrimination based on sex is legal. Or rather constitutional, and thus non-universal federal laws leave loopholes.If you don't believe me ask Antonin Scalia
The only time I know of that discrimination is legal, is in conducting surveys for statical research, or giving preference to veterans and/or the disabled.
And don't take the surveys very seriously, about 10% of the surveys turned in are fake due to inability to get the target group to fill them out. Used to work for a survey company, people get paid to take surveys and they still say no or even funnier "I don't want what you're sellin'!" I still remember that lady, though I think she was having a bad day.
This may shock you, but there are a number of different ways in which polls are conducted. Indeed what you describe would be one with a higher margin of error and whose results might be circumspect in trusting.
But I think I understand a little better where you get your "statistics are meaningless" meme.
|
|
It isn't about margin for error, if we couldn't get enough people to fill out the survey before the deadline we would fill in the excess.
Though, I never meant meaningless, just lower quality, in general. Thoughusing statistics improperly makes them meaningless, simply from stating false info just because it looks true.
A problem with statistics is, it's easy to make such a mistake. People take stats about crime rates in a country with gun laws and think they are linked, but if those stats just chart crime rates and the only divisor for those stats is national boundries, then there is no established link between crime rates and gun laws. Such people are basically putting words in the mouth of staticians.
A sample size of one is almost always a bad sample size anyway.
Again, you're taking your experience with ONE type of survey, one that was (from what you've said) done unethically, and you're assuming they're all done that same way.
And, assuming you're not a statistician, you're ascribing to a discipline something you know little about other than your own predilection to be confused by it.
|
|
I'm not confused by it. It is a combination of math and logic, my area of talent.
A is B.
B is C.
Therefore A is C.
Logical and true.
A is B.
C is D.
Therefore A is D.
Error, not logical.
Just one type true, but it is to point out that missing info can make a statement meaningless and useless.
And perhaps not every survey company is as unethical, I'm sure there is a fast food place with actual clean dishes, as in without "grease" stuck in the corners of all the pans too. Doesn't mean I believe it to be everyone except where I have worked, which means likely a significant portion.
Mix that with the fact that many things go unreported or improperly/incompletely reported, is using only a sample, and doesn't always include the flip side of the coin, means lower quality info. People who see the papers only see the paper, think about your resume/applications for a job, how well does that piece of paper tell HR whether you are capable of doing your job? There's a reason there is an interview before actual hiring, because the paper tells only a small part of the story. (Now if only people would equate my mother's ability with her 35+ years of successful experience, instead of her lack of degree.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not confused by it. It is a combination of math and logic, my area of talent.
Sorry, couldn't read past that, laughing too hard.
I mean. Seriously. You just said "A sample size of one is almost always a bad sample size anyway." And then go on to say, basically, "nope, I worked for one survey company once, therefore I know how all statistical studies are conducted" thus rationalizing your dismissal of any and all legitimately conducted studies...and allowing you to fall back on believing a single anecdote over dozens and dozens of such studies.
*head asplode*
|
|
I didn't say anything of the sort, only that is was unlikely that I was at the one and only company to use unethical methods, which by it's very nature that statement admits the possibility of things going either way.
I didn't say that every, or even most, or even many, companies acted that way. There is no such thing as "all or none." Besides unethical surveys isn't even a foundation principle of my arguement, merely minor suppporting evidence.
Second, most of what I said had to with statistics and not anything to do with statistics companies or their results. Hence the resume example, it was about the fact that reports alone do not clarify a situation regardless of that reports accuracy, and whether it is interpreted accurately is another consideration.
Someone could look at my mother's resume and notice that her Army discharge is "other then honorable" and think she got into trouble or something, which would be false, the standard discharge from military service is "other then honorable" and you have to apply to get it changed to honorable, (presumably because most benefits are granted only to those with honorable discharges) thus an accurate statement gives a false immpression.
They could notice the lack of a degree and stop reading before noticing the 35+ years of experience to make up for it. People don't inherently understand reports from something they have no connection with.
You cannot understand death, until you have witnessed it, no matter how many reports you read. You think you understand until you witness it, then you realize how foolish it was to believe you had a clue. The same principle applies to everything else in life.
Statistics is highly distilled information, if you distill alcohol, just how much is left of whatever was fermented to get that alcohol? The further you refine and distill it, the farther it gets from it's point of origin.
People looking at statistics are far removed from the source and don't always have the frame of experience to properly understand it, the highly distilled statistics the take only the bare bones of it makes this effect worse. They are good reference, but the quality is poor by it nature.
|
|
Actually, here is a good way to think of it,
Take a map of your neighborhood, you can point easily to your house.
Take a map of your county, not so easy to point at your house.
Take a map of your state, how about now?
Statistics is like a map of the continent, useful but so much detail is missing.
Statistics also requires being alighned right, you have to know which way is north, and what all the colors and symbols mean. For an amatuer they might think they got, but they look really silly holding it upside down, looking for road that isn't even on there.
Wasn't there a saying about how statistics always lie?
stuff
I have a feeling, DLH, that any in-depth conversation between the two of us is going to be very difficult and time-consuming. However, I am game.
Where to start?
Men and women have different parts. Through sexual reproduction, the male, who has a penis, impregnates the female, who has a vagina. She then carries the gestating fetus for nine months and then gives birth to a baby human which then takes, on average, 15-18 or so years to mature (35+ and counting in my particular case.) I think there's a picture of one somewhere up above.
In our group-living mammalian species, over the years, many different arrangements have been arrived at to work our way around the drawbacks of these biological processes.
Most of them have been very unpleasant for our sisters. I suggest that to take a sample of them you watch the two seasons of Rome, read The Scarlet Letter and Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, and, maybe listen to some Bikini Kill albums. Others might have other suggestions.
However, capitalism, with its increased productivity of labor, has built a world in which, by drawing women into the ranks of the proletariat, has created the possibility for true women's liberation.
Socialism, a society based upon democratically planned collective economy and production for human need rather than private gain, could, to crib from a list from Gore Vidal above, build child-care centers, provide free abortions, pay equal wages and end marriage.
Does that help any?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks to modern genetic science it seems that men themselves are no longer necessary for the process. So I think we need to make new reasons for them to keep us around. :)Men and women have different parts. Through sexual reproduction, the male, who has a penis, impregnates the female, who has a vagina. She then carries the gestating fetus for nine months and then gives birth to a baby human. I think there's a picture of one somewhere up above.
Well, thankfully for us as a gender, a sizeable majority of women occasionally enjoy having a penis in their vagina.
Thanks to modern genetic science it seems that men themselves are no longer necessary for the process. So I think we need to make new reasons for them to keep us around. :)
You need men to deal with other men. Thats why the species has been maintaining ~50/50 ratio despite the fact that ~1/10 would be the most optimal from a purely reproductive point of view. If your society/subspecies has too many women, then you're short on clubs when your male neighbors try to enroach.
Added an edit in, just under the wire.
Um, like most threads it has meandered far from its origins. Unlike most threads, though, we've ended where we started: Marxism using feminism to destroy the biological family.
IIRC, circles are pretty feminist.
Unless that Angry White Male is a Marxist; then he's afraid of different stuff.
Everything in this thread, The Musical Interlude:
Camille Paglia
The Continued Devaluation of Black Womanhood
Angela Davis
Sexual Assault as an Omnipresent Threat
oh yeah I forgot
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Andrew R - protecting us from internet sarcasm by claiming reverse racism since 2010.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First world problems.
Oh there are angry white females, they don't get as much air time because of the look at me Diva behaviour of the angry white males.
As noted above Gina, Sarah, Margaret, to name a few.
Until there is gender parity male a+%***&#s are going to stand out far more then female ones.
So if you are tired of your gender and background being made to look like a bunch of violent greedy racist s!$~ heads stop moaning tell the f~@#ers that a ruining it for the rest of us to take themselves out of the gene pool.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Andrew R - protecting us from internet sarcasm by claiming reverse racism since 2010.Just tired as hell of hearing "white male" as something derogatory as well as insinuating that life is perfect for us and how dare we have any concerns.
Speaking as a white male, we deserve most of the crap that we get. Our "concerns" (especially those of our most conservative brethren) are often shallow and stupid, and honestly we'd probably benefit from a little more open mockery.
You can be offended, but none of us will care.
|
Over reliance on the 'Angry White Male' stereotype is sloppy thinking though. It's the same sort of black and white thinking that Limbaugh and other demagogues exploit.
Outside of an extreme triage situation, coming up with a calculus of suffering where you compare the problems of different groups of people and then rank the validity of their concerns is of marginal utility. Especially when the solutions for the majority of the problems tend to be the same and will benefit everyone:
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, removal of subsidies, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Over reliance on the 'Angry White Male' stereotype is sloppy thinking though. It's the same sort of black and white trap that Limbaugh and other demagogues exploit.
It is, but it makes for effective rhetoric. The most egregious conservative diatribe and proliferation comes from those angry white men. It isn't a complete perspective, but if your goal is simply to highlight a problematic element, it's spot-on.
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.
Hawkshaw for President.
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.Hawkshaw for President.I, like your current president, have a birth certificate problem :) I'm a canuck.
Hawaii isn't part of Canada.
Over reliance on the 'Angry White Male' stereotype is sloppy thinking though. It's the same sort of black and white trap that Limbaugh and other demagogues exploit.
It is, but it makes for effective rhetoric. The most egregious conservative diatribe and proliferation comes from those angry white men. It isn't a complete perspective, but if your goal is simply to highlight a problematic element, it's spot-on.
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.Hawkshaw for President.
It's nice to see that you have come around to Third Party Voting, Comrade Betts.
It's nice to see that you have come around to Third Party Voting, Comrade Betts.Over reliance on the 'Angry White Male' stereotype is sloppy thinking though. It's the same sort of black and white trap that Limbaugh and other demagogues exploit.
It is, but it makes for effective rhetoric. The most egregious conservative diatribe and proliferation comes from those angry white men. It isn't a complete perspective, but if your goal is simply to highlight a problematic element, it's spot-on.
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.Hawkshaw for President.
Hawkshaw's stance would see broad Democratic party base support. I expect a strong primary campaign followed by frantic backpedaling to center in the general.
Progressive tax rates with strong redistributive / anti inequality measures, responsible and representative government, rule of law, strong human rights.Hawkshaw for President.I, like your current president, have a birth certificate problem :) I'm a canuck.
Hostile foreign takeover it is, then.
|
|
I think there is a big problem with thinking in terms of "angry white men", and that problem comes when people start forgetting that it is merely a stereotype, and that it doesn't apply to all white guys.
A case of potential to become that which was overcome.
@ Doodlebug
I have a much better idea now, though I think connections were made that were happenstance.
Originally in the pagen cultures women were on top socially, if not politically, they were considered to have the divine power to create life, then christianity came by, and poof women were relagated to lower station.
Capitolism wasn't responsible for women's liberation oppurtunities either, it was having a country built on "equality" and the expansion of the definition of equality in a time of need, namely the war. It just so happened that capitolism was our economic system, but it really wasn't the only choice available, and other choices could have still led to women's liberation.
Also, socialism isn't needed to complete the equality transition either. Besides, why would you want to work for wages, in any system?
Time is what is really needed for women to become truly equal with men. Nowadays, people are still alive from before women were free, it is a major change in the social structure and no amount of economic change is going to suddenly complete the process overnight. You have to let the populace forget that the inequality ever existed, for if the concept becomes foreign and unbelievable, that is when women will be truly equal.
|
Oh there are angry white females, they don't get as much air time because of the look at me Diva behaviour of the angry white males.
As noted above Gina, Sarah, Margaret, to name a few.
Until there is gender parity male a%@&#+%!s are going to stand out far more then female ones.
So if you are tired of your gender and background being made to look like a bunch of violent greedy racist s!%~ heads stop moaning tell the f&!!ers that a ruining it for the rest of us to take themselves out of the gene pool.
The same applies to all peoples, not just whites. Blacks might not sound like nothing but jobless criminals and deadbeat dads. But talk that way about any group but whites and you get called a racist. insult whites that way get a pat on the back from the liberal crowd.
The same applies to all peoples, not just whites. Blacks might not sound like nothing but jobless criminals and deadbeat dads. But talk that way about any group but whites and you get called a racist. insult whites that way get a pat on the back from the liberal crowd.Oh there are angry white females, they don't get as much air time because of the look at me Diva behaviour of the angry white males.
As noted above Gina, Sarah, Margaret, to name a few.
Until there is gender parity male a%@&#+%!s are going to stand out far more then female ones.
So if you are tired of your gender and background being made to look like a bunch of violent greedy racist s!%~ heads stop moaning tell the f&!!ers that a ruining it for the rest of us to take themselves out of the gene pool.
You crack me up.
Hmm. Well, I don't know about you guys, but I am Angry, Male and Green.
One More Musical Interlude before you guys get my new favorite thread closed.
The same applies to all peoples, not just whites. Blacks might not sound like nothing but jobless criminals and deadbeat dads. But talk that way about any group but whites and you get called a racist. insult whites that way get a pat on the back from the liberal crowd.Oh there are angry white females, they don't get as much air time because of the look at me Diva behaviour of the angry white males.
As noted above Gina, Sarah, Margaret, to name a few.
Until there is gender parity male a%@&#+%!s are going to stand out far more then female ones.
So if you are tired of your gender and background being made to look like a bunch of violent greedy racist s!%~ heads stop moaning tell the f&!!ers that a ruining it for the rest of us to take themselves out of the gene pool.
All bigots are a@+&%#+s, but not all a~~!&#$s are bigots.
I can see why that might confuse you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm. Well, I don't know about you guys, but I am Angry, Male and Green.
One More Musical Interlude before you guys get my new favorite thread closed.