Home › Forums › Open Discussion › when celebrities speak..
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 1, 2015 at 6:22 am #822173
Jd seattleParticipantYes2ws – I didn’t see anyone joking/”flippantcy” about that posters situation?
March 1, 2015 at 6:34 am #822174
JanSParticipantJd..see posts #70, 71, 72….flippant…
March 1, 2015 at 6:39 am #822175
yes2wsParticipantThank you, Jan. All I could do was sigh when I saw the last post.
March 1, 2015 at 6:44 am #822176
Jd seattleParticipantAnd what do post 70,71,72 have to do with singulars situation?
March 1, 2015 at 7:02 am #822177
yes2wsParticipantLet’s see… JoB saw it.. I see it.. JanS sees it…
I’m reminded of a post on the first page directed at another poster…”you are very lucky not to have first hand knowledge of the gender bias against women.”
But if you did, I have a feeling you would see it, too.
March 1, 2015 at 7:05 am #822178
yes2wsParticipantOr heck, not even necessarily first hand knowledge. Maybe, instead, just a smidgeon of miws’ compassion would suffice.
March 1, 2015 at 7:41 am #822179
Jd seattleParticipantSo if I don’t completely 100% agree with you that equals zero compassion? I don’t know how many times I said there is inequality against women and it’s not right. But because I don’t swallow the .77 number whole and have the nerve to discuss it I have some how turned into the opposition. And to top it off I am a man so I have no understanding of what discrimination must be like on the receiving end.
If people want to have a closed door discussion with only the ones that 100% share their views this is the wrong place to be. And if you can’t talk about a divisive subject without getting offended by posts that have nothing to do with the actual subject being discussed then again, wrong place to be.
March 1, 2015 at 10:00 am #822180
JanSParticipantso you are basing your whole part in this conversation on a number…you have to have everyone agree that you are right, but you’re really not discussing what the OP said. You’re just nitpicking. So…instead of saying .77, let’s just say, for argument’s sake, it’s .85. Now…where are you going to go with this? even if it’s .93, it’s still not equal. I’m not sure I’m quite understanding where you’re going with this, Jd?
March 1, 2015 at 10:03 am #822181
JanSParticipanthere s the original post in it’s entirety(no mention of .77):
“I don’t know which was more inspiring..
Patricia Arquette’s speech last night at the Oscars or Meryl Steep’s reaction
and then there is this performance by Matt Damon that is once again floating through cyberspace..
http://www.upworthy.com/one-of-matt-damons-finest-performances-was-never-in-theaters
and in all fairness. Clint Eastwood is spouting off these days too..
but someone else can link to him ;0″
why are we arguing about what the damned percentage is? Unequal is unequal…
March 1, 2015 at 1:27 pm #822182
yes2wsParticipantAgain, I go back to miws. He’s a man; and who knows what he thinks the number might be. We don’t know, because he’s voiced his thoughts about the issue of discrimination itself. He hasn’t gotten hung up on some number that some guy decided to interject, as an experiment, into a thread that carries pain for others. Miws instead displayed compassion. He didn’t joke around and act flippant in a thread where another poster shared her experience and pain. From some of your talking points, Jd, I actually do think you have a bit of compassion toward this issue. But I also think, when entering a thread such as this, a less flippant attitude could go a long way toward making someone else feel heard and understood.
March 1, 2015 at 4:00 pm #822183
Jd seattleParticipantI think both of you have missed my entire point. Go back and read my multiple explanations. I am not using .77 as a measurement, I am using it to identify which formula people use to calculate inequality. Lets change it to inequality A and inequality B if it pleases people and stops this confusion everyone seems to be having.
I’m still not sure how my post about beating this subject to death and telling everyone to have a good weekend is a flippant attitude. That was my way of saying we are getting no where in this conversation so let’s move on. I think if you read all of my posts you will find they are quite mild.
I have plenty of compassion yes2ws, but I choose to place that compassion with what I see as true inequality. Like singulars situation. I do not place it with people who try to paint women as helpless slaves that are victimized at every turn in life. I give women much more credit than that. Do we have a real wage gap? Yes, but it is not because women are being forced to work less hours and get degrees they didn’t want in college.
March 1, 2015 at 4:31 pm #822184
dobroParticipant“Do we have a real wage gap? Yes…”
How would you rectify this gap that we all seem to agree is real?
March 1, 2015 at 4:53 pm #822185
Jd seattleParticipantDobro- I don’t have a great answer for that. Precisely why I agreed it would be a more interesting conversation about 30-40 posts back.
March 1, 2015 at 5:04 pm #822186
SmittyParticipant“How would you rectify this gap that we all seem to agree is real?”
As to the 5% gap that exists after accounting for education, experience and choice of profession, I think it comes down to negotiating skills, as the Department of Labor report suggests.
That may sound flippant, but society (still) raises males one way and females another (for the most part). Not saying that’s good or bad – and certainly not saying it is anyones fault – it just is what it is.
Not sure how you legislate that.
That said, we are evolving. More men are becoming nurses and more women are becoming doctors. More women graduate college than men – eventually these young women will work there way into positions of power. More men are deciding to stay home and raise the kids than ever before. The dynamic is changing for the better on its own.
March 1, 2015 at 7:12 pm #822187
JoBParticipantJD
” I do not place it with people who try to paint women as helpless slaves that are victimized at every turn in life.”
ah.. the roadblock we run into every time we try to bring this subject up.. men’s defensiveness.
once again.. you create an argument that i certainly never made and then shut it down to prove your point.
i certainly don’t see women as helpless slaves.. i see them as realists.. doing the best they can in a game that is rigged against them from the start.
March 1, 2015 at 7:19 pm #822188
JoBParticipantdobro..
we can enforce the equal wage laws that are currently on the books by instituting fines for companies whose wage gender gap stats exceed an acceptable norm…
the way it is now the wage secrecy policies at most companies make it very difficult for individual women to gather the information needed to file a lawsuit…
and if they file they face substantial financial hardship and employment discrimination while they wait for their claim to work it’s way through the courts.
March 1, 2015 at 7:21 pm #822189
JoBParticipantAs for addressing that figure that infuriates defensive males.. 78% as of 2013 stats…
since women are disproportionately hired at minimum wage or less (with most exceptions to the rule being jobs predominantly held by women)..
raising the minimum wage to something resembling a living wage would substantially close that gap.
March 1, 2015 at 7:22 pm #822190
JoBParticipantimagine that..
a rabid feminist comes up with sensible solutions
who knew that it was so easy ;-)
March 1, 2015 at 7:40 pm #822191
Jd seattleParticipantI haven’t put words in your mouth JoB, the picture you paint is quite clear.
I see men’s opinions are not welcome unless in total agreement. I’ll leave you all to carry on.
March 1, 2015 at 8:15 pm #822192
JoBParticipantJD..
the picture you paint with my words is quite clear to you..
but that doesn’t mean it’s the picture i had in mind or the way i think.
this has nothing to do with men’s opinions versus women’s opinions
but it does have a great deal to do with the assumptions one makes when examining data..
inaccurate assumptions will give you inaccurate conclusions every time
March 1, 2015 at 8:34 pm #822193
Jd seattleParticipantOnce again JoB, no assumptions going on with .77 number. It’s just a fact that some seem to have a tough time coming to terms with. No amount diversion will change that.
March 1, 2015 at 9:00 pm #822194
JoBParticipantJD…
the number is accurate.
the number for hispanic women versus all men is even worse.. hovering at 50%
claiming that the number is inaccurate because to many of those women work in lower paid professions sort of begs the point, doesn’t it.
here’s some stats for you that might put the enormity of the problem in perspective
“The United States had about
115 million households in 2011
(Table 1). Family households numbered
76 million, which included
about 56 million married-couple
households and 5 million male and
15 million female householders
with no spouse present.”
this comes from an interesting government publication…
http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-570.pdf
and based on the same census stats.. this from the Pew Research Center
” Single fathers are more likely than single mothers to be living with a cohabiting partner (41% versus 16%). Single fathers, on average, have higher incomes than single mothers and are far less likely to be living at or below the poverty line—24% versus 43%. “
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/07/02/the-rise-of-single-fathers/
this 2013 census also offers these stats
number of single household men over 65
564,698
number of single household women over 65 2,033,280
this statistic is important because income for those over 65 is startlingly different
“On average, women 65 years and older rely on a median income of around $16,000 a year — roughly $11,000 less than men of the same age, according to a Congressional analysis of Census data. And many elderly women rely exclusively on Social Security benefits.”
http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/13/retirement/retirement-women/
This isn’t a men’s issue or a women’s issue..
it’s an economic issue for all of us
March 1, 2015 at 9:24 pm #822195
SmittyParticipant“claiming that the number is inaccurate because to many of those women work in lower paid professions sort of begs the point, doesn’t it.”
Um, no. It is accurate. Nobody ever said different.
Glad we all finally agree that people make varying life choices that make up the vast majority of the 23% differential.
As more men stay home to raise the kids and more women become doctors rather than nurses the 23 cent difference will continue to shrink.
Now, if you are saying nurses should be paid the same as doctors, you will lose me.
March 1, 2015 at 10:01 pm #822196
Jd seattleParticipantOk, let’s lay out some indisputable facts.
Women make up 47% of the work force. Men, 53%~~~~ that’s a 6% difference!
Full time women workers worked on average 35.8 hours per week. Men worked an average of 40.8.~~~~ that’s a 5 hour per week difference per worker!!
26% of working women worked part time. Men, 13%~~~~ that’s a whopping 13% difference!!!
JoB, are you going to tell me these stats don’t have an enormous role in the .77 cent figure? Do you view these as proof of wage inequality? I’m looking for a yes or no answer please.
Oh, and here are my sources.
March 1, 2015 at 10:13 pm #822197
JanSParticipanty’all are still making this about numbers, and not about the inequality. Arguing and pointing that out is futile. It’s still a man’s world…because..well, look at Jd’s post ..men work harder, men work longer, women have the babies, so don’t devote to careers like men…so..NUMBERS say…women get less…I suppose that’s the end of the argument. Men vs, women…heaven forbid there be a discussion about inequality, instead of friggin’ numbers. It’s not all about women’s choices..but unless you’re a woman, you will not ever understand, I don’t think. This us vs. you is dumb…I’m moving on…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.