3 ms·

What a cess pit of bigoted bullshit the comments are. HN is the only place I have encountered in the modern world that still tries to argue against gender equa

What a cess pit of bigoted bullshit the comments are. HN is the only place I have encountered in the modern world that still tries to argue against gender equality along with weak justifications for disparity. Arguments I haven't heard expressed at all in the UK since the 1970s or 80s. No one still asserts in good faith that the world is flat, pay inequality is not a serious issue, or reinvents the timeline of actual history or even thinks that there is still debate to be had. It's basically a settled issue, and I see no evidence that any UK or European men are pushing against it. America on the other hand, and I assume it's mostly the US nature of HN that causes this, seems to be still firmly stuck with the views of the 1950s. Still resenting the unfairness 60 years after equal pay laws? get real. FWIW I managed to read the article with interest, without a single thought it was a myth. Or screaming unfair from my wealthy white male, privileged perspective.

nicc 8y ago
Who has argued against gender equality..?
ralusek 8y ago
People aren't arguing that women and men should be paid differently on the basis of their sex. The argument is simply that it doesn't make any sense to look at two disparate figures and assume they differ primarily due to discrimination. The pushback so far has actually proven that this is sensible, as the more confounding variables are accounted for, the more the gap decreases. You'll notice that up until a few years ago, and sometimes to this day, pundits, professors, politicians, presidents and the public at large were completely comfortable stating that "women make 77 cents on a man's dollar." People were prepared to legislate for "equality" on the basis of this fact alone. But some people correctly stop and say, "Wait, but why? You're prepared to legislate, but you're just assuming that they're paid differently because of sexism you're attempting to correct." Well, it turns out that the 77 cents on a dollar was arrived at by literally just comparing what women at large make vs men at large. But do men and women do the same jobs? Do they even work in the same fields? Depending on profession, the answer is a resounding no. So then the question becomes "do women doctors at this hospital who see the same amount of patients and work the same amount of hours and have the same track record and went to the same school and have the same seniority etc etc make less than the respective men." The more that is controlled for, the more the gap disappears. What you are saying is that you can't believe sexist Americans stuck in the 1950s aren't prepared to legislate to remedy this issue, and that the pushback offered in this thread is evidence of people uninterested in gender equality. That's just not even close to the conversation that's being had, and I'm personally glad, whatever the topic, to have as much nuance brought forward as possible. Nobody is arguing against equality, it's just that you're mistaken in your assumption that this is what _you_ are arguing for. Also, regarding the UK, please note Carl Benjamin, Paul Joseph Watson, Nigel Farage, Helen Pluckrose, among others, if you insist on the assertion that pushback is limited to those outside your country.
_monster_ 8y ago
Leftist idiot is ill informed? -- what a surprise? (I didn't make claims -- just asking questions)

nicc 8y ago

Who has argued against gender equality..?

ralusek 8y ago

People aren't arguing that women and men should be paid differently on the basis of their sex. The argument is simply that it doesn't make any sense to look at two disparate figures and assume they differ primarily due to discrimination. The pushback so far has actually proven that this is sensible, as the more confounding variables are accounted for, the more the gap decreases. You'll notice that up until a few years ago, and sometimes to this day, pundits, professors, politicians, presidents and the public at large were completely comfortable stating that "women make 77 cents on a man's dollar." People were prepared to legislate for "equality" on the basis of this fact alone. But some people correctly stop and say, "Wait, but why? You're prepared to legislate, but you're just assuming that they're paid differently because of sexism you're attempting to correct." Well, it turns out that the 77 cents on a dollar was arrived at by literally just comparing what women at large make vs men at large. But do men and women do the same jobs? Do they even work in the same fields? Depending on profession, the answer is a resounding no. So then the question becomes "do women doctors at this hospital who see the same amount of patients and work the same amount of hours and have the same track record and went to the same school and have the same seniority etc etc make less than the respective men." The more that is controlled for, the more the gap disappears. What you are saying is that you can't believe sexist Americans stuck in the 1950s aren't prepared to legislate to remedy this issue, and that the pushback offered in this thread is evidence of people uninterested in gender equality. That's just not even close to the conversation that's being had, and I'm personally glad, whatever the topic, to have as much nuance brought forward as possible. Nobody is arguing against equality, it's just that you're mistaken in your assumption that this is what _you_ are arguing for. Also, regarding the UK, please note Carl Benjamin, Paul Joseph Watson, Nigel Farage, Helen Pluckrose, among others, if you insist on the assertion that pushback is limited to those outside your country.

_monster_ 8y ago

Leftist idiot is ill informed? -- what a surprise? (I didn't make claims -- just asking questions)