#metoo

[Snarky Oracle!]

The pay gap has been closing, but it still exists. Women are often passed over for promotions they have earned simply because they are women. That's a fact.

The wage gap is also a scam, a carefully cnnstructed myth, and has been debunked many times by reputable economists.

Your data is utterly outdated, and manipulated by the sources it comes from.

Unless, of course, you think the Mattel toy company really has an all-male board of directors, like you see in the BARBIE movie --- even though it's 50/50 in real life.

Suckers.

The "wage gap" is based on men and women choosing different kinds of jobs and working different amounts of hours. But the "gap" is only valid if they're being paid a different amount per hour for the same number of hours in the same job. Which is not what's happening.

Get off the mainstream media, forgodsake.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Outcomes matter!

It matters to the people who are involved with a certain selection process, which are all case-by-case. And if the woman is the best man for the job then she should be the preferable choice.
But to say that "things should be different" just "because things should be different" sounds a bit hollow to me. Maybe it looks good for a PowerPoint presentation - behold our fabulous stats - but I'm still not sure why this should improve the public opinion.

Also, a bizarre side effect of the quest for equality is that to make the woman "more" you have to make the man "less". Call me old-fashioned, but I wonder, is that what women really want?

 

[CeeCee72]

The wage gap is also a scam, a carefully cnnstructed myth, and has been debunked many times by reputable economists.

Your data is utterly outdated, and manipulated by the sources it comes from.

Unless, of course, you think the Mattel toy company really has an all-male board of directors, like you see in the BARBIE movie --- even though it's 50/50 in real life.

Suckers.

The "wage gap" is based on men and women choosing different kinds of jobs and working different amounts of hours. But the "gap" is only valid if they're being paid a different amount per hour for the same number of hours in the same job. Which is not what's happening.

Get off the mainstream media, forgodsake.

Yeah.

Listen here, I am getting a little tired of your condescending superiority complex.

I worked in the IT field for 20 years. I had more experience, more certifications, and better job performance reviews than any of my co-workers (who all happened to be men) year after year. I helped design the HR software at a major university and wrote the user manual for it. I was passed over for promotions several times and once it was even SAID it was because I was a woman s who had children at home. My starting pay was $7000 less a year than any of the men they hired after me.

I don't need to get off main stream media, but you need to get off your high horse. SOME of us have opinions that are formed by real world experience.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Yeah.

Listen here, I am getting a little tired of your condescending superiority complex.

I worked in the IT field for 20 years. I had more experience, more certifications, and better job performance reviews than any of my co-workers (who all happened to be men) year after year. I helped design the HR software at a major university and wrote the user manual for it. I was passed over for promotions several times and once it was even SAID it was because I was a woman s who had children at home. My starting pay was $7000 less a year than any of the men they hired after me.

I don't need to get off main stream media, but you need to get off your high horse. SOME of us have opinions that are formed by real world experience.

But is what you're tired of what matters, and my complexes?

It's unfortunate you were screwed over on your job. I hope you sued when they SAID it was because you were a woman.

 

[CeeCee72]

But is what you're tired of what matters, and my complexes?

It's unfortunate you were screwed over on your job. I hope you sued when they SAID it was because you were a woman.

I filed an HR complaint and was FINALLY promoted. I was a public employee, we couldn't sue, had to go to arbitration.

I'm not tired of what matters, but it's irritating when you ASSUME my opinions are formed by garbage I read on mainstream media. I know they're full of shit. I have real world reasons for feeling the way I do and so I'm nicely asking you to consider that possibility before you chastise me.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I filed an HR complaint and was FINALLY promoted. I was a public employee, we couldn't sue, had to go to arbitration.

Good. You did the right thing. Someone was unfair to you and you won, even if arbitration became necessary. Wish you'd included that in your original story, but it's good to know.

 

[CeeCee72]

Good. You did the right thing. Someone was unfair to you and you won, even if arbitration became necessary. Wish you'd included that in your original story, but it's good to know.

This is a prime example of why there will always be a gap between men and women. You have one set of experiences, I have another. We are different. We think differently, we react differently, and we feel differently. We are not, and will never be equal.

But, we all deserve the same opportunities. Frankly, I don't believe we're there yet. And I don't know if we ever can get there. That's all I am saying.

 

[Angela Channing]

It matters to the people who are involved with a certain selection process, which are all case-by-case. And if the woman is the best man for the job then she should be the preferable choice.
But to say that "things should be different" just "because things should be different" sounds a bit hollow to me. Maybe it looks good for a PowerPoint presentation - behold our fabulous stats - but I'm still not sure why this should improve the public opinion.

Also, a bizarre side effect of the quest for equality is that to make the woman "more" you have to make the man "less". Call me old-fashioned, but I wonder, is that what women really want?
View attachment 59503

That's not how it should work and generally that's not how it does work. An employer will set the minimum criteria that both male and female candidates should have so whoever is chosen is able to carry out the job successfully. However, employers should look at who is applying for their jobs, who gets through each stage of the selection process and who finally gets offered the job. If there is a significant difference in the gender mix at any of the stages then they need to look at their processes to find out why. Not because things should be different but because things should be fair.

 

[Angela Channing]

This is a prime example of why there will always be a gap between men and women. You have one set of experiences, I have another. We are different. We think differently, we react differently, and we feel differently. We are not, and will never be equal.

But, we all deserve the same opportunities. Frankly, I don't believe we're there yet. And I don't know if we ever can get there. That's all I am saying.

You make a good point and illustrate why we need to listen to experiences of women rather than just discussing this hypothetically from our male perspective. I also think you highlight why a more diverse workforce is desirable so different perspectives can be brought to an issue which ultimately benefits everyone, regardless of our gender.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

You make a good point and illustrate why we need to listen to experiences of women rather than just discussing this hypothetically from our male perspective.

But it helps when women don't pretend to be men. Men who don't have access to Wikipedia yet sometimes they do.

 

[Frank Underwood]

A couple of points.

-"Always believe the women" is something that I have always despised. I would say "always LISTEN to the women." However, we should always listen to the men too. After all, at least 1 in 6 MEN are sexually assaulted in their lifetime and they have a hard time getting justice too.

I appreciate you saying that. Some people tend to have a more myopic view, despite claiming to value both genders equally.

- Equal opportunity versus equal outcomes - Unfortunately, women still do NOT have equal opportunities in the US workforce. The pay gap has been closing, but it still exists. Women are often passed over for promotions they have earned simply because they are women. That's a fact.

I filed an HR complaint and was FINALLY promoted. I was a public employee, we couldn't sue, had to go to arbitration.

I don't deny that it's happened, and it certainly shouldn't. There's always progress to be made, but I believe providing equal opportunities is more important than demanding a balanced workforce. The right person for the job should always be the one to get it. If people aren't being hired or are being passed over for promotion because of their gender, that's obviously a problem. But I would like to think that's less common now. Some employers are unscrupulous and discriminatory, but at least there are ways to challenge it.

- Mental health - This country has refused to confront the mental health crisis for years now. Most of our mass shootings are a direct result of mental illness. Clancy's actions were a direct result of mental illness. YES, both men and women should be held accountable for the crimes they commit, mentally ill or not, but perhaps the best way to reduce these horrific crimes is to elect representatives who are willing to do something about the lack of access to mental health care for BOTH men AND women.

I don't disagree with that. I've always supported better access to mental health services. The amount of troubled people we've had in the US for decades is staggering. Of course, I don't know which representatives are actually willing to do something about it. Republicans certainly aren't, and establishment Dems are constantly undermining the "socialists" who actually want to ensure that everybody has access to vital healthcare services. Most politicians just want to pass the buck, and people end up suffering for it.

That said, I've noticed that homicidal mothers generally tend to illicit a more sober response about their mental health than a homicidal husband (or school shooter). I know full well that mental health issues are real, but we can't treat them or undo the crimes of the people suffering with these issues retroactively. Perhaps they belong in an institution more than a jail, but either way, they certainly don't belong in society once they've crossed that line. I feel that way regardless of whether the criminal is a man or a woman.

 

[Frank Underwood]

The "wage gap" is based on men and women choosing different kinds of jobs and working different amounts of hours. But the "gap" is only valid if they're being paid a different amount per hour for the same number of hours in the same job. Which is not what's happening.

Yes. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 ensures that men and women in the same workplace performing jobs that require similar skill, effort, and responsibility must receive equal pay. Pay can only vary for reasons such as tenure, education, and experience. If there's proof that pay discrepancies were due to gender, then that employer would be in violation.

 

[Frank Underwood]

Also, I don't get why the hiring process is automatically flawed if there's an imbalance. From elementary through high school, the majority of my teachers were women. When I go to the hospital or a doctor's office, the majority of the nurses I see are women. My last three primary care doctors have been women. Most of the receptionists I see are women. Most of the supervisors at the call center I worked at were women. Much of the wait staff in restaurants I've been in have been women. And yet I've never written a complaint demanding they revise their hiring process so that the number of men and women they hire is 50/50. I always just assumed they were the most qualified for the job.

 

[Angela Channing]

Also, I don't get why the hiring process is automatically flawed if there's an imbalance. From elementary through high school, the majority of my teachers were women. When I go to the hospital or a doctor's office, the majority of the nurses I see are women. My last three primary care doctors have been women. Most of the receptionists I see are women. Most of the supervisors at the call center I worked at were women. Much of the wait staff in restaurants I've been in have been women. And yet I've never written a complaint demanding they revise their hiring process so that the number of men and women they hire is 50/50. I always just assumed they were the most qualified for the job.

Do you think that's a good thing? Some men might feel uncomfortable being examined by a female nurse. Young children, especially young boys, benefit from having positive male role models in their lives. To provide the best possible service, those employers should be thinking about what more they can do to attract more men to fill those roles.

If a restaurant's front of house staff is predominantly female, you can bet your money that back of house (head chef, sous chef, commis chef, pattissier, etc.) will be predominantly male. No prizes for guessing which group gets paid more (clue it's not the females).

There is no earthly reason why men or women should be better in any of the jobs you mentioned so if there is a large gender disparity there must be some other factor at play. All those roles could be missing out on some very talented workers who could bring so much to their organisations if those employers investigated why they are choosing to hire one gender in preference to the other.

 

[anndra w]

Do you think that's a good thing? Some men might feel uncomfortable being examined by a female nurse. Young children, especially young boys, benefit from having positive male role models in their lives. To provide the best possible service, those employers should be thinking about what more they can do to attract more men to fill those roles.

If a restaurant's front of house staff is predominantly female, you can bet your money that back of house (head chef, sous chef, commis chef, pattissier, etc.) will be predominantly male. No prizes for guessing which group gets paid more (clue it's not the females).

There is no earthly reason why men or women should be better in any of the jobs you mentioned so if there is a large gender disparity there must be some other factor at play. All those roles could be missing out on some very talented workers who could bring so much to their organisations if those employers investigated why they are choosing to hire one gender in preference to the other.

I don’t think we can get ourselves into a situation where patients feeling uncomfortable is taken into consideration when being treated by a female nurse. We could end up with straight women saying they don’t want lesbian nurses examining them or members of the racist community objecting to non white doctors or nurses. I think society would be in a much better place if folk started to think that their feelings are not the be all and end all - if they’re uncomfortable tough - they’re being looked after and that’s what’s important - their welfare and their health.
Given how boys are often raised being taught that empathy is a weakness I think there are reasons - that we should tackle - for why some men might be very unsuited to caring roles.
I don’t mind professions having more of one gender or the other - I do object to barriers but in primary teaching, being male is an advantage because there is such a shortage of male primary teachers - if women want to be primary teachers and men don’t that’s fine - but there’s certainly no barrier or inequality of opportunity involved in that.

 

[CeeCee72]

Gloria Steinem, the most famous feminist in the world and strong supporter of #metoo has died at 92 years old.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Gloria Steinem, the most famous feminist in the world and strong supporter of #metoo has died at 92 years old.

And disapproved of by much of woke-fourth-wave for not being extreme enough.

6 months after the Depp/Heard court case in 2022, Steinem came out (probably pressured to do so) in support of Amber Heard, resulting in 30 feminist organization following suit --- Steinem clearly knowing little about the Depp/Heard case.

And, to be fair, she was already 150 years old. She was also a well-known CIA asset.

But... she was a star. Articulate, glib, telegenic, cleverly manipulative, and all the things that the queen of Second Wave needed to be.

 

[CeeCee72]

And disapproved of by much of woke-fourth-wave for not being extreme enough.

6 months after the Depp/Heard court case in 2022, Steinem came out (probably pressured to do so) in support of Amber Heard, resulting in 30 feminist organization following suit --- Steinem clearly knowing little about the Depp/Heard case.

And, to be fair, she was already 150 years old. She was also a well-known CIA asset.

But... she was a star. Articulate, glib, telegenic, cleverly manipulative, and all the things that the queen of Second Wave needed to be.

I remember that about her and Heard. Made me very uncomfortable. I didn't follow the trial, but read enough to know Heard wasn't the victim she portrayed herself to be. My whole take on the Depp/Heard thing was that they were both spoiled, entitled celebrities who drank way too much and probably abused other substances. Not sure why the rest of us were supposed to care about either of them.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I remember that about her and Heard. Made me very uncomfortable. I didn't follow the trial, but read enough to know Heard wasn't the victim she portrayed herself to be. My whole take on the Depp/Heard thing was that they were both spoiled, entitled celebrities who drank way too much and probably abused other substances. Not sure why the rest of us were supposed to care about either of them.

Not only did Heard behave in court in an overtly pathological way, there were audiotapes played (which Depp had recorded) in which Amber admitted she was the abuser, called Depp "a baby" for not wanting to get hit, admitted that she found it frustrating that he always left the room "whenever I want to fight," and predicted that she "would win" if this went to court "because I'm a thin, blonde woman."

But you'd only know that if you happened to be watching it live on CourtTV that day, because I haven't heard those damning tapes replayed in the media since. (If the genders were switched, we would have heard them replayed endlessly).

When she lost the case, she then dismissed the verdict as being the result of "misogynistic" social media, and Depp's geriatric sex-appeal stardom winning over the jury.

Depp's various ex-girlfriends spoke well of him, while Amber's arrest for domestic abuse of her previous lesbian lover wasn't permitted to be discussed in court.

6 months later, I suspect Gloria Steinem was pressured to come out and support Amber Heard, and she may not have understood the case. (Gloria was almost 90, after all). Then again, Steinem once asserted that gay male porn was just the acting out of the sexual oppression of women with an all-male cast... So, gay male sex is apparently really All About Women -- especially if there's a camera on the premises.

 

[CeeCee72]

I never knew any of that - like I said, I didn't follow the trial. I was ambivalent about the whole thing but after reading that, I think Heard got off very easy. Depp lost almost everything if I remember correctly.