Does that keep under considerations working hours?
I’ll not mention maternity leaves, that would be too easy.
Does that keep under considerations working hours?
I’ll not mention maternity leaves, that would be too easy.
Exactly, I’m sensing some Marxist ideals being masks as equality here as well and it’s dangerous. Unless you can find me evidence nursing schools are purposely rejecting males students and hospitals not hiring male nurses I’m ok with men not wanting to be nurses. You can’t force people to do jobs and force this unnatural equality in the perfect utopia in your mind. It’s a dangerous idea
Where they enforce or even give maternity leave.
Thereby lies the difference in my mind between a developed country and one that is not: give paternity leave as well as maternity.
And that’s cool. But can you say 100% that with the men who do, they have not faced any form of judgment, suspicion, or questioning at all in their career choices? Ones that female nurses don’t have to face? Therein lies the issue. Every child is unique - it’s best we eliminate these deterrents for our kids to truly empower them.
They shy away from nursing because they don’t want to be nurses. You may be correct that this has something to do with “traditional gender roles”, but as long as everyone’s happy, the question remains: so what? How does society at large lose out?
I’ve met quite a few (Taiwanese) men who were pressured into becoming, say, engineers when they wanted to be artists, but this was less to do with “gender roles” than parental ideas of what constitutes a “proper job” (ie., one that will provide for their retirement). This happens a lot less in The West; generally speaking, men who want to be artists, or nurses, or whatever, aren’t pressured by their parents (or anyone else) to choose something different, and even if they were, they take no notice.
You can call it what you like, but the fact remains that a body can only be in one place at a time. If they’re sitting at a desk pushing buttons, they’re not looking after their family. That applies to both men and women (see @Andrew0409 's posts).
Implicit in your answer - the ‘real job’ part - is the belief that money is indeed more important than people. That the things we do simply because it is the right thing to do are valueless because the economists have refused to put a dollar value on them. Nevertheless, the things we do for free, without expectation of any reward, monetary or otherwise, are often the ones we are most proud of. Nobody on their deathbed ever speaks proudly of the wonderful sales presentation they did when they were a young hotshot stationery-products salesman.
Agree. I’d make films for free if I didn’t need to pay rent or feed people.
Suspicion of what? Who are these people suspicious of male nurses, probably morons who don’t matter. Can you say that 100% of people you met wasnt like why don’t you pick a more stable and realistic career instead of directing? My sister is in the same spot. She is a assistant casting directors for Warner brothers. She wants to be a director as well in the future. It’s hard, any job has risks and people might not think it’s great. But it’s your life, unless she or male nurses are directly discriminated for their race, gender or whatever. They can follow their dreams.
This is true. Also does not negate previous statement.
Here’s the thing though. You’re doing what you enjoy and coincidentally get paid for it. As you said, you’d still do it anyway (rent and bills aside) even if you didn’t get paid.
Now consider the 95% of humanity that only turns up for work because they have bills to pay. They absolutely fucking hate going to work, their only opportunities for respite being a) getting ratarsed at the weekend b) going on a package holiday once a year and c) death. Roughly 50% of those people are women. So where is this much-vaunted ‘liberation’? Where are the meaningful, fulfilling careers? All that’s happened is that the number of female peons is now equal to the number of male peons.
I’m being intentionally precise with that word (meaning both a debt slave and an unskilled underdog). Ask any couple where most of their income goes and they’ll say ‘the mortgage’. This was mathematically impossible when women literally refused to work: the banks were only able to extract their pound of flesh from one member of the couple. Since the 70’s, house prices have risen in direct proportion to the number of women in the workforce. You might argue that this is simply a result of increasing population pressure and the like, but from where I’m sitting I can see a vast horde of humanity performing pointless tasks that they loathe simply so that the kings of finance can prosper.
I’m not arguing that all women should just go back to the kitchen. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle anyway. Merely pointing out that the bastards always win, and whatever bones and scraps they give you with one hand will be taken away with the other.
So? What’s it matter that I love part of my job and you hate yours? Women are adults, let them each decide. Just like how some people want kids, some people don’t (and this is regardless of sexual biology). What are you, “protecting” them? Please. Hey @Icon do you need finley’s protection?
Life is crappy enough as is. So how about we give all our kids the same environment to decide what they each want to do? We’re humans, not cattle. Individuality is what distinguishes us from more primitive species. Or if life just has no hope and 99% of us are doomed, then why should the girls who do grow up to find fulfilling jobs be setback by additional BS that their male siblings don’t already have to?
Imagine if the senate men’s health committee is composed of just women. They can’t truly empathize, even if they try to sympathize. It’s ineffective, or at the very least not as effective as if men, already knowing what they need and don’t, make those calls (which they do). By the way, in this regard (crusty old men deciding policies on women’s health), the laws truly aren’t fair and just (at least in America).
You see, in my eyes it is you who thinks women need “protection” as you call it. I’m telling women they are not victims of this misogynistic patriarchy that people think is oppressing women. Of course there are many incidences where we need to take a look at inequality and injustice for women, just like there are some damn good ones for men that are never talked about. I’m saying let people choose what they want, I feel like you are pointing to certain break downs of demographic and pointing “hey, there arent enough women or men in this position or job or social position, lets put more there” when it’s just how things worked out. If a men arent interested in being nurses why push them? Is the option not open? Is there some legal precedent that prevents men from being nurses? are nursing schools and hospitals not allowing men to be nurses? Not that I know of. Just like no one is pushing women to be coal miners, construction workers, bricklayers and oil drillers, but they just want the nice looking jobs like being a CEO…
What you are portraying is this perfect utopia in your mind thats of course better than what we have. But it’s dangerous, sometimes tyranny and evils of it has come in the mask of equality the way you are going. Before it came under bourgeois vs working class, now it’s men and women. I see a lot of commonalities in what you are trying to do. But perhaps i’m wrong, how do you propose we change things? With the government and laws? Do women not have every right a men has and have anti discrimination laws that protect not hiring and paying some less? What more can the government do? You want the state to propose a more basically socialist idea of controlling human resources and force more hiring of women?
Or i guess a social change, which takes time unless it’s forced like we just mentioned. We are taking the softer way taking our hands off while giving everyone the same opportunity as possible without some tyrannical government.
And let me ask you this, if we can indeed just pay women less for the same work…everyone would just hire women, youre a CEO like you said yourself, do you look at gender or your profits at the end of the month when you hire someone?
But the natural order of things are as such and I feel organic. And women have every legal right to pursue any job and have every right a men has. And at many incidences, less of the burdens like others pointed out like military draft and conscription.
I actually see your point, however I don’t know the qualifications of these men. You can point out individually if someone is unqualified or made a bad decision…but to say men can’t make policies on womens health thats fair is pretty sexist of you. First of all, senators are elected officials that like you said, need the votes of women which as you pointed out makes up half of the population. So if women and men want more female senators, guess what? They can vote for them and the ones they think are more qualified to make laws. Also, so are you saying lets say (I assume youre a man) that you had testicular cancer and the head oncologist and the most qualified one is a women, you would request male doctor just because the women can’t truly empathize? Men and women are capable of making health and medical decisions of both genders if they have the qualification. Being a man or women doesn’t automatically disqualify you from being capable of making good laws on the health of the other sex.
And the fact that you said “crusty old men” is basically my point of the double standard of sexism and men bashing I see today. imagine the shit storm I would face if I insisted wrinkly old women are incapable of making laws.
Then give me specific laws and judges and I will stand with you. Again you can’t just say these things are happening and not give me any way to help you therefore you’re always the victim and I’m the bad guy. I’m not saying it’s not happening, I actually believe there are probably some unfair laws in Taiwan towards women. Point me to them instead of just saying your the victim over and over again to me. What I can do. Tell you I’m sorry my gender is so horrible. Do you want a solution or just be a victim and blame men and the system.
If this is the case, my question is whose fault is that if 50% of the population is female. It isn’t like females are the minority voters here. They like you say make up around 50% of the vote, and women can vote just like men and their votes count exactly the same.
Then you and your partner can do something different. Marriage and children are not forced into you or anyone. And if you do get married and or have children guess what? You get to decide what you want to do naming your child. Maybe I think it’s weird my parents named me. I picked my own English name. And you can always change it or go by another one. I’ve never heard of anyone refusing to call someone a name they asked to be called. Omg some people might think it might be weird to have your mothers name? How horrible. And some children do take their mothers name. I know people who did and I’ve never heard anyone say anything negative or give them this BS you keep saying people are giving them. And what is this BS you keep saying it’s happening. I can say a lot of BS is happening but it doesn’t do the world much good does it.
Oh, you’re telling women? I guess you know best. (Sigh. I mean, I can tell you are trying to understand, so just really listen. One thing we can both agree on is that we have a broken system, whether it is in law or (one could argue, more importantly) in practice.)
You just contradicted yourself.
You haven’t read the articles I’ve sent you a few months ago, have you. Also, we probably should. “Real men should be this” “Real men should do that” aren’t great for our sons either.
These have already been answered. Learn to distinguish between in law and in practice. Humans don’t live in a bubble. For thousands of years we have raised our kids with pieces of prejudice passed down from archaic times. Social commentary can kill a man/woman.
“They just want the nice looking jobs”? Who is lumping billions of people together and then generalizing now? If given a choice, would an average family man choose oil drilling/life risking for small pay over a white collar/fair paying job?
Still is. This hasn’t gone away. You and I are both speaking from a perspective of certain privilege, no doubt. But our positions do not affect fact, we are each too small to have decidedly sweeping effects on all of humanity.
No. At least when it comes to reproductive laws. Show me all 50 states where all women can individually decide what they want to do with their own bodies (not including another woman’s) and I will agree with you.
Most women still aren’t getting equal pay for equal work.
Every single human atrocity and inequality in our history has had to be corrected by conscious, collective decisions to change. Do you think things would be identical for African Americans today if we didn’t start the civil war? Or if MLK didn’t start his activism? It’s easy to say let’s take our hands off and trust that rainbows and unicorns will slowly make it better when you already hold the privilege that your counterparts don’t. This is why millions of women marched in DC. Why millions more joined them around the globe. All I’m saying is, listen to them. Activism for the most part isn’t fun or easy, people have jobs. Yet en mass we’ve had women literally come out on the streets to tell you their pain, on an incredibly massive scale. The least the rest of us can do is to truly listen. Why aren’t you?
Read above. Re: military, it should be on a voluntary basis, no doubt. But to tie that exclusively to reproductive law or use it as an excuse/trade off is regressive and counterproductive. The believers of voluntary military service and the believers of fair reproductive laws should be on the same team.
Uh, what I said was when it’s solely men making such policies we are missing an immense piece of the puzzle to truly be effective when deciding what’s best for those it will affect.
This has been previously answered.
The surgical practice of medicine cannot be exactly equated to the ideals that fuel policy making.
That’s true. But has it worked? Ask the millions of women who march. So, something clearly needs to be fixed.
Re-read the posts regarding human history.
Nope, this was directed at them personally - that committee of crusty old male politicians. If a dude has nothing to do with it, he should not be subjected to the same level of insults.
That’s funny. Do it. But again, if we’re not generalizing all male humans on Earth, then you can’t present it as all wrinkly old women. So you know, say it. Nancy Pelosi is a big girl, she can take it. Or whoever you feel unjust about.
Honestly, those women who you’ve witnessed who are really bashing men (collectively) for no reason - they’re either morons or jerks. They don’t matter.
Oh you know what I mean, don’t twist words now.[quote=“Rockefeller, post:115, topic:166200”]
You just contradicted yourself.
How, I just said there are of course incidences of inequality and we can look at them individually and it’s not this whole system of misogynistic patriarchy thats oppressing them. It’s an individual or individuals in that particular incident.
So how do you expect it to change if not by law? You still havent answer this key question.
Actually some of these life risking jobs pay more than a shitty white collar job in a cubical. I’ve met people who enjoys working on a oil rig compared to a office job. Yes, most people would probably go for the white collar job, but others do choose it. And i’m just pointing out, whenever we talk about unfairness, people and you for this case point to the CEOs and not a coal miner. Why aren’t you pushing for more female coal miners? Why didn’t you post a stat on the percentage of coal miners who are female? Lets me honest here now.
Yes, better check my privilege PC principle. Had to throw that ad hominem in there. The situation i’m in or born into doesn’t disqualify my position or i can say maybe your perspective from a certain privilege also makes it hard for you to really see the issue and therefore also wrong or not accurate.
And are you admitting your a socialist/marxist? if so, i’m pretty much done since I’ve already read what you are probably thinking years ago.
Reproductive laws has to do with human rights, it’s complicated and why is it only a woman can decided to say it’s ok to abort a baby or fetus or call it a fetus and not a baby. Is it not a violation of human rights to kill a person? When is a baby a person or a fetus, there are ethical dilemmas to this. This my body my rights is too simple in my opinion, such an approach disregards the role of men as co-creators of life and the life-changing trauma that losing a child in such a deliberate way can have on men along with financial responsibilities a man is legally required to have by law. And before you say men can wear contraceptives, females also have many options for contraceptives and both parties engaged in an activity that they willing knew could produce this consequence. Sorry, lets say around a certain point a fetus is a fetus and a human being a human being. How about lets say right before the baby is born…it’s still part of your body, surely you don’t think a women has the right to kill a baby right before the baby is born?
then like I said, women would dominate the work force if they can work equally for less. It’s a ridiculous notion that a simple econ 101 course would have taught anyone could not be true or we would see it. In a competitive work market, wages are determined by supply and demand for labor. Both the people hiring and people providing labor are price takers…so if women are taking jobs for less than the market value of wages compared to their counterparts. They are doing so willingly or are intrinsically bad at negotiating wages. Or firms would all hire women because they can pay them less. I can’t believe i’m using econ 101 to explain what a bullshit notion you just said is. If you don’t understand, theres probably basic econ videos on how wages work in a competitive work market.
I listened, and I find it most of what they said misinformation. And often like the original article posted using them as proof of their oppression when it’s not even real news!!! Should I just stay silent? In most of the free world, you are going to have your ideas challenged.
Like saying women make less, I believe its 21% less. But how did they did to this number, if you ever took a high level stats class you would know that matters. They basically came to that number by taking every single full time worker (full time is 35 hours) without breaking it down into fields or even taking account hours worked over 35 which statically men on average work more hours not including time off from pregnancies. Even though the number is statistically accurate, it’s very misleading and isn’t by any means an accurate representations of the wage gap. Like you pointed out earlier when I said that if I divide Fortune 500 CEOs into males and females, females actually make more is not a of great statistical value. Perpapse look at how the other statistics are reached. It’s really easy to manipulate statistics, it’s actually why business stats majors are paid a lot. They’re got at finding ways to reach valueable statistics and filter out bad ones.
Again if you took a basic econ class, or youre a business owner. If you can pay anyone literally 25% less, you would make so much more profit. Unless youre saying businesses are really bad at math and not good at making money.
On the other side of the coin, misinformation towards the wrong purpose and marches have also lead to calamity. So no, you don’t just mindlessly accept something as true.
i’ve never said that.
than like I said, public elected officials have terms and you can rally the next senate election to vote for people you think would do a better job. Thats how a democratic republic works. They don’t have a permanent seat, but remember women voted for them…or just didn’t vote. So don’t blame it on men.
No, but i’m making a point that you disqualified these men from being able to for no other reason than being men. Did not give me a single reason other than they are crusty old men.
Perhaps you should get a refresher yourself, there have been women’s marches and actually things got done. Actually they marched for laws in equal rights and got them. Tell me what the new marches are trying to accomplish. Like be specific because it’s all over the place. There have also been forgettable and ideologically flawed marches that we don’t remember or even read about in history. Not every single movement and march has ideas that work or are right.
And vast majority of men love women, do you catch my drift? Has nothing to do with people spreading misinformation about the issue at hand.
Loving (fill in the blank) isn’t proof that bigotry doesn’t exist towards the fill in the blank group, so publicly proclaiming that so and so loves men isn’t proof of the absence of misandry.
The most infamous case, however, came in 1937. Hugo Black had been nominated for the Supreme Court, and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had just uncorked a series of articles revealing Black’s past involvement in the Ku Klux Klan. Black’s defense memorably included the line “Some of my best friends are Jews,” which earned him no small amount of scorn from newspaper editorialists (that line, after all, had been the title of a book-length history of anti-Semitism by Robert Gessner the previous year). That line couldn’t stop Black’s confirmation—and he later made amends with his critics through his work on the Court—but the phrase stuck. In 1967, shortly before his death, Black repented and told The New York Times that he had no idea this was a favored weasel phrase of anti-Semites . . . .
where I say there is a problem is not here. When someone is interested in something, they cannot pick it up due to social pressure of gender roles. The laws are equal. Individuals can pick it up with their wills. But one gender needs really strong will to do it against the social and cultural pressure, comparing that the other gender who has the same degree of interest can do it with no obstacle if having enough ability.
I don’t deny tendencies of each gender, but there certainly exist individuals who are off the tendencies. Those people often face the pressure pushing them in their socially supposed tendencies. The pressure is not from one gender to the other, but from majority of both genders to outsiders. (Forgive me I’m just talking on gender roles of male and female, and not including other genders here.)
Minorities are not powerless out of choice. First they are beaten uinto submission, then it just becomes the norm.
Seriously, just talk to some of your female friends, see how their work environment goes.
It is not just your gender. Yes, women are responsible because we are perpetuating sterotypes by treating boys one way, girls another, having different expectations and making kids useless by catering to every wish. Gus are also trapped in stereotypes because they cannot show their emotional side without being called affeminate. These attitudes are changing because people are aware of them more now and that si the key: to understand that teh current order of things is not ideal, it is wrong, it holds people back and harms both men and women.
I know a few women who think The Handmaid’s Tale is semi-autobiographical too.