Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[SwampCreature]

pretty bias and unreliable,

Bias is not a word in this context you utter moron

 

[skilts]

Bias is not a word in this context you utter moron

Which part of what was written eluded your understanding?

 

[kfc1]

The argument that traditionally female jobs are undervalued and underpaid is a good one. I've worked in those fields myself (where I sometimes faced discrimination as a potential sex offender) and agree that they should be better paid. You can argue for better pay for teachers and child care workers and nurses and carers without it being a gender issue though. In fact making that a gender issue would be sexist.

These roles are generally underpaid because they do not contribute directly to earning revenue for anyone. Child care is a great example because on one hand you have parents complaining it is too expensive and then on the other hand you have people complaining the workers should be paid more. The growth in wages in higher paying jobs generally stems from increased revenue over the years.

 

[SwampCreature]

Which part of what was written eluded your understanding?

When did I say I didn't understand it?

 

[The Coup]

These roles are generally underpaid because they do not contribute directly to earning revenue for anyone. Child care is a great example because on one hand you have parents complaining it is too expensive and then on the other hand you have people complaining the workers should be paid more. The growth in wages in higher paying jobs generally stems from increased revenue over the years.

Yet another failing of the profit motive and capitalism.

It fails to value public services in any other terms than GDP or profit, as a result, it massiverly underpays people whose jobs are not for the purpose of making money.

It then tries to turn those jobs into profit driven jobs, to the detriment of the actual service provided.

 

[skilts]

When did I say I didn't understand it?

So, you are saying that this communication achieved its required purpose, and allowed you to understand what was meant. On what basis could you think it necessary to chip him about the terms in which that communication was couched, other than to be a rather sad smart arse?

 

[Illinois Nazi]

So, you are saying that this communication achieved its required purpose, and allowed you to understand what was meant. On what basis could you think it necessary to chip him about the terms in which that communication was couched, other than to be a rather sad smart arse?

Maybe you should take a look in the mirror...

 

[skilts]

Maybe you should take a look in the mirror...

I am unable to understand this post.

 

[SwampCreature]

So, you are saying that this communication achieved its required purpose, and allowed you to understand what was meant. On what basis could you think it necessary to chip him about the terms in which that communication was couched, other than to be a rather sad smart arse?

I think this may be the wankiest post ever made on bigfooty. Ever.

 

[skilts]

I think this may be the wankiest post ever made on bigfooty. Ever.

You should have been here in 2002.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

I am unable to understand this post.

You would see a sad smart arse.

 

[skilts]

You would see a sad smart arse.

It is still unclear what you mean. You're not very good at this, are you?

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Skip to 2:51



inb4 "That's not Australia we're so different"

 

[fleabitten]

Watched that when it came out and was disappointed in John Oliver. I'm a fan but most of that was garbage. The only part that actually made a reasonable point was about the Jennifer/John study which does seem to show a clear gender bias. Interestingly, of the people assessing the applications, women were just as likely as men to favour the male candidate. Quoting the authors of the study: “The fact that faculty members’ bias was independent of their gender, scientific discipline, age, and tenure status suggests that it is likely unintentional, generated from widespread cultural stereotypes rather than a conscious intention to harm women”

Things like this are what might account for the actual gender pay gap (whatever that is once you strip away all the obvious stat padding). It would be nice if we could bypass the BS and the conversation about discrimination could start at that point.

 

[scon]

I think this may be the wankiest post ever made on bigfooty. Ever.

yeah..nah..you've got it covered easily.

Bias is not a word in this context you utter moron

Fullstop.
Is not a sentence.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

The sources are on the images.

AWOTE is not comparing same hours worked specifically, but any standard or agreed work over the 35+ hour full time cutoff. So a physical therapist working 38 hours a week is directly compared to a heavy industry project manager working 55+ hours per week, for example.

The study compared people in the same jobs, you peanut. Not doing very well are you, one set of stats from Canada, one ten years out of date and no actual knowledge of the topic at hand. To top it off, a couple of likes from the intellectual nobody, mottrain.

 

[SwampCreature]

yeah..nah..you've got it covered easily.


Fullstop.
Is not a sentence.

It's 'full stop' you intellectual troglodyte

 

[cartwright]

Watched that when it came out and was disappointed in John Oliver. I'm a fan but most of that was garbage. The only part that actually made a reasonable point was about the Jennifer/John study which does seem to show a clear gender bias. Interestingly, of the people assessing the applications, women were just as likely as men to favour the male candidate. Quoting the authors of the study: “The fact that faculty members’ bias was independent of their gender, scientific discipline, age, and tenure status suggests that it is likely unintentional, generated from widespread cultural stereotypes rather than a conscious intention to harm women”

Things like this are what might account for the actual gender pay gap (whatever that is once you strip away all the obvious stat padding). It would be nice if we could bypass the BS and the conversation about discrimination could start at that point.

I hadn't seen that John Oliver clip. I didnt think it was garbage, more in line with his standard way of presenting a story

What are the cultural stereotypes? We've already had the nuffies suggest that women don't work as hard, or don't take jobs in the right industry. Its surprising that people still believe this, today

 

[fleabitten]

Oh, it was totally in line with his usual way of presenting an issue, I just thought that it lacked his usual in depth analysis of the topic. Like I said, only one thing he mentioned backed up the argument at all. The rest was basically just repeating information that has already been explained away and mockery of anyone who doesn't agree that the gap is so large. Dismantling the pay gap myth on a show such as that would have endangered his career, so I guess it's not surprising. He'd be copping it like Bill Maher is copping it about Islam at the moment.

Cultural stereotypes that would work against a young female applicant in that situation would be things like concern that she will get pregnant and have to take a bunch of time off work. Or just the idea that men and women are suited to different kinds of work and have different ways of thinking. It might be interesting to conduct the same experiment for two people applying for a child care position. I wouldn't be surprised to see the female candidate receiving more favourable results despite them having identical resumes.

 

[fleabitten]

Another article from Time, this one about #ShirtStorm

http://time.com/3589392/comet-shirt-storm/

Taylor’s shirt may not have been in great taste. But the outcry against it is the latest, most blatant example of feminism turning into its own caricature: a Sisterhood of the Perpetually Aggrieved, far more interested in shaming and bashing men for petty offenses than in celebrating female achievement.

 

[kfc1]

It's an earnings gap.

And it won't change until women stop shitting out kids. Which is an impossibility.

This is the crux of the matter.

From the fact sheet:

"Other factors that contribute to the gender pay gap include:
a lack of women in senior positions, and a lack of part
-
time or flexible senior roles. Women are more likely
than men to work part
-
time or flexibly because they still undertake most of society’s unpaid caring work
and may find it difficult to access senior roles

women’s more precarious attachment to the workforce (largely due to their
unpaid caring responsibilities)

differences in education, work experience and seniority

discrimination, both direct and indirect"

Points 1-3 essentially revolve around the choice to have children and to devote time to caring for the rather than pursuing a career.

Point 3 - "differences in education, work experience and seniority" is also something that is very rarely addressed in these "pay gap" statistical analyses.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

The crux of the matter is about 'women shitting out kids'? FFS you're as bad as him.

 

[SpuriousPea]

The study compared people in the same jobs, you peanut. Not doing very well are you, one set of stats from Canada, one ten years out of date and no actual knowledge of the topic at hand. To top it off, a couple of likes from the intellectual nobody, mottrain.

I was referring to the methodology behind AWOTE, specifically. So, you're wrong, that is not based on the same number of hours. Anything over 35+ is lumped together.

Looking over the study cartwright posted, the "same jobs" you're referring to are based on categories as broad as "professionals" and "managers", which is re tarded. And once again, without controlling for actual hours worked.

Good effort on your fallacy filled rebuke, though. Seeing as you can't into statistics, you certainly can into vapid smugness.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

I was referring to the methodology behind AWOTE, specifically. So, you're wrong, that is not based on the same number of hours. Anything over 35+ is lumped together.

Looking over the study cartwright posted, the "same jobs" you're referring to are based on categories as broad as "professionals" and "managers", which is ******ed. And once again, without controlling for actual hours worked.

Good effort on your fallacy filled rebuke, though. Seeing as you can't into statistics, you can certainly into vapid smugness.

Yes, the ABS categories are '******ed' and you are correct

The ABS figures do take into account actual hours worked.

 

[kfc1]

The crux of the matter is about 'women shitting out kids'? FFS you're as bad as him.

Not my terminology