Society/Culture Feminism - 2016 Thread

[Maggie5]

Don't worry about Maggie. She is just showing her hypocrisy again. Maggie loves to use the 'I didn't see it' or the 'I haven't read that' defence before breaking into a rant on how all these other things were said about Bob Brown's Bitch!

And so the poster without an original thought in his head has posted.
However it is good to see he is capable of posting more than one liners.
Anything to add about the subject or do you just want to attack me?
Not surprised at your likers. Wonderful support group.

 

[DemonTim]

$37.40 an hour? Seriously where are you getting your information from? Admin assistants get more than that. My friend's son was doing filing in his gap year and earnt $33 an hour, granted that's alot for what he was doing but I digress, Lawyers earn MUCH MUCH MUCH more than $37 an hour.

ffs.

No need to be a smart arse. I didn't compile the data

Make a complaint to the people that did if you disagree http://www.sbs.com.au/yourlanguage/...alia-earn-way-more-average-full-time-employee

What? No I'm not.
You are...
I'm just expanding on a point you made...

And where are you getting your information from?
Such as 'most tradies will be running their own business after ten years'?


You made a comparison between a group of jobs at their start, to show there is little difference between pay. I asked you what the similarities in pay would be like after ten years, and you're telling me it's an invalid comparison?

The comparison has been invalid from the start, it's why I pointed out to Nicky it's already been discussed

Australian self employment stats and anecdote? 2 million people in australia (out of a workforce of around 14) are self employed. The highest concentration of self employment is in construction.

It's almost impossible to find the statistics your asking for, but you would assume since the base is similar, and the average is similar, depending on the trade, some are a fair bit higher, some are almost the same :
Plumbers: 70k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/construction/plumbers
Brickies: 58k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/construction/bricklayers-stonemasons
Plasterers: 50k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/construction/plasterers
Labourers: Just over 50k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/construction/labourers-building-plumbing
Electricians: 78k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/construction/electricians
Nurses: 55k https://www.open.edu.au/careers/healthcare-medical-pharmaceuticals/registered-nurses

Probably also need to take into account that nurses average hours are around 2 lower on average, than all of the above (If they bumped the average to 38, which is the lowest average above nurses of the above, then they would be on 58k)

The comparison people seem to make that registered nurses (average 55k), earn less than the average tradie (70k), it's a stupid point, registered nurses is one segment of nursing, "tradie" covers all trades. If you want average of nurses vs trades you'd need to take into account specialist nurses.

 

[DemonTim]

And so the poster without an original thought in his head has posted.
However it is good to see he is capable of posting more than one liners.
Anything to add about the subject or do you just want to attack me?
Not surprised at your likers. Wonderful support group.

You said you were done, then came back into to attack someone (and anyone who liked what they said), for attacking people, and not adding to the topic. The hypocrisy is strong.

 

[Maggie5]

You said you were done, then came back into to attack someone (and anyone who liked what they said), for attacking people, and not adding to the topic. The hypocrisy is strong.

As have you, well done!

 

[CM86]

The comparison has been invalid from the start, it's why I pointed out to Nicky it's already been discussed

Australian self employment stats and anecdote? 2 million people in australia (out of a workforce of around 14) are self employed. The highest concentration of self employment is in construction.

It's almost impossible to find the statistics your asking for, but you would assume since the base is similar, and the average is similar, depending on the trade, some are a fair bit higher, some are almost the same

The comparison people seem to make that registered nurses (average 55k), earn less than the average tradie (70k), it's a stupid point, registered nurses is one segment of nursing, "tradie" covers all trades. If you want average of nurses vs trades you'd need to take into account specialist nurses.

Agree.

Also if you compare the wages of industry with a high concentration of women, say nursing, against industry with a high concentration of men, say trades, the wage disparity is vast. It's no coincidence that women dominated industries aren't (monetarily) valued as highly as those dominated by men.

Starting salary of a nurse ranges from 53-63k depending on state (all but Vic are 59+)
An electrician average starting salary once qualified is 62k (electricians are renowned as one of the giver earning trades)
People need to stop making s**t up

I know you know exactly what I'm talking about. And now you're just digging your heels in and being stubborn.

Not that interested in getting into a slinging match with you.
You're not backing your statements, and you're just looking for an argument.

 

[DemonTim]

I know you know exactly what I'm talking about. And now you're just digging your heels in and being stubborn.

Not that interested in getting into a slinging match with you.
You're not backing your statements, and you're just looking for an argument.

So you skipped:

Sigh. This has already been discussed.
Many doctors are paid less than decent trades people. But you don't list that because it doesn't fit the narrative you're trying to push

And then claim i'm not backing myself, after I provide sources that support the averages and starting salaries.

I'd say you're looking for an argument if anything, you haven't provided one source, haven't made a point. Just come in here and gone the man.

 

[DemonTim]

As have you, well done!

Pointing out your hypocrisy, isn't hypocritical. I didn't claim to be done, or try to take the high ground on input and attacks.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Not sure medicine and law are good examples of "male dominated" fields. The m/f ratio is about 2:1 but that's mainly concentrated in the older generations where women largely didn't see themselves having careers. About 45% of medical students and 60% of law students are female.

And it's pretty obvious why doctors get paid more than nurses isn't it? Nothing to do with society placing a greater value on male dominated fields.

 

[DemonTim]

Not sure medicine and law are good examples of "male dominated" fields. The m/f ratio is about 2:1 but that's mainly concentrated in the older generations where women largely didn't see themselves having careers. About 45% of medical students and 60% of law students are female.

And it's pretty obvious why doctors get paid more than nurses isn't it? Nothing to do with society placing a greater value on male dominated fields.

I think after accounting for other factors, the gender wage gap is largely due to older generations. Areas such as med/law/CEOs are still boys clubs because often it takes years to get into the area, and the changes to womens careers and pay are fairly recent. I'd say from the changes already made, and the attitudes in society, it will become minimal soon.

 

[CM86]

So you skipped:


And then claim i'm not backing myself, after I provide sources that support the averages and starting salaries.

I'd say you're looking for an argument if anything, you haven't provided one source, haven't made a point. Just come in here and gone the man.

You made a comparison of starting salaries, to show that there is no divergence in wages from female dominated areas and male dominated areas.

I asked you if that remains the same after 10 years. Or 15, or 20. Because i believe the starting salary doesn't show the true story, which meant that your point wasn't a strong one.

You replied saying that most tradies are running their own business after ten years, and that it can't be compared anymore.

I, so far, had made no statement, I had only asked questions, so I don't need to provide anything.

You know that my point was wage divergence over time. You're pretending that you're not following it.
I'm not interested in a pissing match with you.

 

[DemonTim]

You made a comparison of starting salaries, to show that there is no divergence in wages from female dominated areas and male dominated areas.

I asked you if that remains the same after 10 years. Or 15, or 20. Because i believe the starting salary doesn't show the true story, which meant that your point wasn't a strong one.

You replied saying that most tradies are running their own business after ten years, and that it can't be compared anymore.

I, so far, had made no statement, I had only asked questions, so I don't need to provide anything.

You know that my point was wage divergence over time. You're pretending that you're not following it.
I'm not interested in a pissing match with you.

How am I pretending to not follow? I gave you averages over career, including wage and hours worked. And said what you're asking for is impossible, because it's not measured.

If starting wage has very little variance, and average has very little variance (unless you consider the highest paid trades alone, vs average nursing). That would be pretty fair to conclude that over time, the variance isn't high. I'm not sure how starting average, and overall average, could be similar, if there was a large disparity after 10+ years.

Stop accusing me of doing things i'm clearly not, i've provided what you've asked for to best availability.

 

[Lebbo73]

And so the poster without an original thought in his head has posted.
However it is good to see he is capable of posting more than one liners.
Anything to add about the subject or do you just want to attack me?
Not surprised at your likers. Wonderful support group.

I am not attacking you Maggie. Just your warped ideology!

 

[BORK]

I love how mens issues are described as trivial by some in here yet one of the two biggest inequality issues for women in Australia is a gender pay gap that wittles down to a few cents in the dollar at most after other factors are accounted for.

Men dieing by suicide at nearly 4 times the rate of women.. Yep that is trivial.

Women having a life expectancy of 4 years more than men.. Complete non issue. (Even though Aboriginal Australians living 10-15 years less than non Aboriginal Australians is rightfully a huge moral issue)

Yet middle class white women not earning a little more for each dollar of their male counterparts is a HUGE issue.

 

[DemonTim]

I love how mens issues are described as trivial by some in here yet one of the two biggest inequality issues for women in Australia is a gender pay gap that wittles down to a few cents in the dollar at most after other factors are accounted for.

Men dieing by suicide at nearly 4 times the rate of women.. Yep that is trivial.

Women having a life expectancy of 4 years more than men.. Complete non issue. (Even though Aboriginal Australians living 10-15 years less than non Aboriginal Australians is rightfully a huge moral issue)

Yet middle class white women not earning a little more for each dollar of their male counterparts is a HUGE issue.

If women were earning less just on the basis that they were women, it would be an issue. It's not the case though.

 

[Maggie5]

I am not attacking you Maggie. Just your warped ideology!

Lebbo, I can't claim to have seen something when I haven't. Unlike a number of posters I am not on FB, I don't visit blogs or sites that I consider extreme views, the only sites I visit are of the main media and what is on TV (ABC24 and I also watch CH7).
In fact I hadn't heard of Clementine Ford until I read about her on this site. To me she seems to be in the same mold as Panahi and Bolt so if I don't visit their sites I wouldn't visit hers. If a poster links to their sites or if I am told by a friend about something they have written, I may look and link and share but not to be outraged but merely for a laugh.

 

[BORK]

Should mention that I do not see men as oppressed. I would not swap being this gender.

Rich and middle class womens issues are given disproportionate attention even though they are among the most privileged people.

Domestic violence is a serious issue that strongly impacts lower socioeconomic status women. When it comes to being a victim of domestic violence it discriminates more on socioeconomic status than it does gender.

White woman= more privileged than Aboriginal, African, Muslim, and Indian background people male and female in Australia.

Rich/middle class white woman= more privileged than low income and socioeconomic status white male.

I should also mention that the idea of only race, gender, sexuality and religion being focused on in the discussion of privilege is stupidly limiting.

Height privilege and being good looking also opens many more opportunities for someone in life. Height impacting males more and looks impacting females more.

Good looking from middle class family white female in her twenties will be given more opportunities than a 160cm tall ugly white male from a middle class family of the same age ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL.

The problem with feminism in Australia is a tendency for some women to want to inherit the oppression faced by other women.

Childless women face a lot less discrimination in the workforce than women with children.

Rich and middle class women are extremely underrepresented as victims of domestic violence when compared with lower socioeconomic status women.

Focusing on gender as THE biggest factor in the issues people face is extremely counter productive when other personal circumstances are much bigger factors. Yet this toxic ideology does exactly that.

 

[DemonTim]

Focusing on gender as THE biggest factor in the issues people face in extremely counter productive when other personal circumstances are much bigger factors. Yet this toxic ideology does exactly that.

I agree with this, a lot.

Strange. For some reason, judging by responses to you, I thought you were some nutbag MRA. Apologies for assumptions.

 

[BORK]

I agree with this, a lot.

Strange. For some reason, judging by responses to you, I thought you were some nutbag MRA. Apologies for assumptions.

I have never really argued for mens issues much on here. I have been controversial in bringing up child abuse as NOT being a gender issue and used government statistics to back that up. That was misinterpreted by many in here including you as trying to make mothers look bad. Then there was the repeated slur of me not knowing how to use statistics.

When I posted that again a month or two back and called everyone out to show how those US statistics were misintepreted that slur died off. My position was vindicated.

 

[DemonTim]

I have never really argued for mens issues much on here. I have been controversial in bringing up child abuse as NOT being a gender issue and used government statistics to back that up. That was misinterpreted by many in here including you as trying to make mothers look bad. Then there was the repeated slur of me not knowing how to use statistics.

When I posted that again a month or two back and called everyone out to show how those US statistics were misintepreted that slur died off. My position was vindicated.

I did? I don't recall having an exchange with you. Might be mistaken

 

[BORK]

I did? I don't recall having an exchange with you. Might be mistaken

Here is a post of mine you quoted.

Chief has said multiple times on this site that men are overrepresented as abusers of children and even said it is not close. That is what they are implying in this part of the post.

They never have anything to back it up despite being requested time and time again. My contention has been that both genders abuse children and there are some categories that are more prone than others including single mothers and stepfathers as examples of disproportionate perpetrators.

The conversation on family violence seems to forget the female contribution to child abuse which is why I mention it more here.

The idea that women and men could be as bad as each other when it comes to the abuse of children seems to do the head in of Chief
They then resort to petulance, insults and abuse because they interpret an inconvenient truth as anti women.

Your reply was this.

Mate. It's pretty clear:
1. You don't get stats
2. You're not trying to push that last claim.

I also found this in another thread when searching for the prior posts.

Adding "feminism" is just using a search with confirmation bias. It'd be like BORK telling someone to google "MRA DV statistics" to see the truth of DV stats

You must have had a real skewed view of me. I have never posted stats from an MRA website and always focused on the issue of child abuse rather than mens issues(in the area of family violence) on this site. This shows the mud that others were throwing at me(because they did not like their world view being questioned) must have stuck. It was other posters trying to make it a gender issue dominated by males and me showing otherwise and then referring to particular sub-groups with unique circumstances as over-represented rather than making it all about gender.

The fact that so many on here seemed to care more about the reputations of women rather than the welfare of children that a group think level of mud was thrown at me for my postings (of legitimate comprehensive US government statistics) is an indictment on some of the posters on the SRP board.

This post is not a shot at you btw.

 

[DemonTim]

Here is a post of mine you quoted.

Your reply was this.


I also found this in another thread when searching for the prior posts.

You must have had a real skewed view of me. I have never posted stats from an MRA website and always focused on the issue of child abuse rather than mens issues(in the area of family violence) on this site. This shows the mud that others were throwing at me(because they did not like their world view being questioned) must have stuck. It was other posters trying to make it a gender issue by dominated by males and me showing otherwise and then referring to particular sub-groups with unique circumstances as over-represented rather than making it all about gender.

The fact that so many on here seemed to care more about the reputations of women rather than the welfare of children that a group think level of mud was thrown at me for my postings (of legitimate comprehensive US government statistics) is an indictment on some of the posters on the SRP board.

This post is not a shot at you btw.

Apologies then, i may have been mistaken in your intentions

 

[nicky]

Why don't you guys get a room? Or make up over PM sex.

 

[BORK]

Why don't you guys get a room? Or make up over PM sex.

We will once you make your triumphant return to this thread.
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...aster-fish-from-the-pacific-inedible.1028624/

 

[BORK]

Apologies then, i may have been mistaken in your intentions

That's fine. No need to but accepted anyway. Diversity of opinions is good. I only wish for people to debate/discuss in good faith. Some posters who I agree/disagree with on many issues do this others do not.

 

[nicky]

That's fine. No need to but accepted anyway. Diversity of opinions is good. I only wish for people to debate/discuss in good faith. Some posters who I agree/disagree with on many issues do this others do not.

Brilliant. You're my new yardstick on how i should conduct myself on this forum.
You. are. amazing.