3 ms·

I suppose you have similar concerns about men occupying the overwhelming majority of physically taxing and hazardous jobs, correct? Obviously, we both know ther

I suppose you have similar concerns about men occupying the overwhelming majority of physically taxing and hazardous jobs, correct? Obviously, we both know there are no intrinsic differences between men and women, so this is a great injustice that women's representation among miners, construction workers, metalworkers, truckers, heavy machinery operators, fishermen, foresters, waster disposal workers, and so on, is virtually nonexistent. And of course you find it outrageous that in the entirety of Asia, Africa and Middle East, white people constitute nonexistent percentage of the population, and there are virtually no white men in the positions of power there. Right?

paganel 7y ago
> physically taxing and hazardous jobs, correct? Do those jobs pay tens of millions in yearly comp and do those men get to decide the faith of hundreds of thousands of their fellow employees? In other words, are those jobs as "powerful" as the jobs held by the people we're talking about? I guess they're not. This is what the whole discussion is about. And to get back to your question the answer is yes, one of my aunts used to be a industrial-crane operator, my mother used to be a construction works inspector or whatever the official name is in English, which meant that she got to be on construction sites pretty much her whole career, but that happened because I grew up in the non-meritocratic Eastern Europe where the regime in place knew that leaving aside half of the population (in this case women) just because society saw those jobs as "not for women" was plain stupid. Incidentally that point was first made (afaik) by John Stuart Mill, interesting to see that his ideas were implemented by nominally communist regimes while beacons of capitalism like Amazon hide behind terms like "meritocracy" that happen to put forward the interests of only part of the people involved.
- dextralt 7y ago
  >And to get back to your question the answer is yes That was not what I've asked, so I'll repeat the question: do you find it unjust that women are underrepresented in those kinds of jobs? Do you find it unfair that ~100% of people unloading truckloads of 50 kg cement bags are men? Do you find it outrageous that ~100% of people welding I-beams 20 meters above the ground in freezing temps are men? That ~100% of people mining coal are men, that ~100% of people getting oil out of the ground are men, that ~100% of people felling, dragging and loading trees are men? And on top of that, I'll ask whether it concerns you at all that white men have such a low level of representation in higher education now, that in some places they qualify for minority status? That their representation in a number of white collar, well-compensated, air-conditioned office jobs is in low single digit percent? >while beacons of capitalism like Amazon hide behind terms like "meritocracy" that happen to put forward the interests of only part of the people involved. The core concept of the civil rights movement is now something you put in quotes and speak of with disdain. The irony.
- smartsystems 7y ago
  I am super upset about what the left did to Star Trek. You want more Africans? Then get at least somebody from Africa. But I guess that's a little too real. I mean they are only 17% of the world population. You want a female captain? How about the much loved captain Janeway? Also, where are all the Mexicans? Where are all the Indians? Based on that alone Star Trek is ignoring 50% of the population. It seems the show has become nothing nothing more than a vehicle for the left wing.
- jl2718 7y ago
  Both of you sound silly. There is no meritocracy nor equality. People get what they get because they have something that somebody else wants: knowledge, skills, connections, whatever. How did they get it? I don’t know. Maybe by hard work, maybe by ingenuity, maybe by risk, maybe by birth, maybe by luck, maybe by theft, maybe by deceit. None of those things are or can be or ever will be equally-distributed. I personally think that a society that encourages the first two tends to work out better than some of the others, but still probably unrealistic.
gacklesmom 7y ago
Didn't take long for the men's rights crowd to show up with their funky fresh brand of sexism.
- exolymph 7y ago
  I'm a woman, and he's right. Care to answer the question directly — are you worried about the lack of women loggers, or do you only care about the high status jobs? If so, real big think moment right there. Wonder why that might be.

paganel 7y ago

> physically taxing and hazardous jobs, correct? Do those jobs pay tens of millions in yearly comp and do those men get to decide the faith of hundreds of thousands of their fellow employees? In other words, are those jobs as "powerful" as the jobs held by the people we're talking about? I guess they're not. This is what the whole discussion is about. And to get back to your question the answer is yes, one of my aunts used to be a industrial-crane operator, my mother used to be a construction works inspector or whatever the official name is in English, which meant that she got to be on construction sites pretty much her whole career, but that happened because I grew up in the non-meritocratic Eastern Europe where the regime in place knew that leaving aside half of the population (in this case women) just because society saw those jobs as "not for women" was plain stupid. Incidentally that point was first made (afaik) by John Stuart Mill, interesting to see that his ideas were implemented by nominally communist regimes while beacons of capitalism like Amazon hide behind terms like "meritocracy" that happen to put forward the interests of only part of the people involved.

dextralt 7y ago
>And to get back to your question the answer is yes That was not what I've asked, so I'll repeat the question: do you find it unjust that women are underrepresented in those kinds of jobs? Do you find it unfair that ~100% of people unloading truckloads of 50 kg cement bags are men? Do you find it outrageous that ~100% of people welding I-beams 20 meters above the ground in freezing temps are men? That ~100% of people mining coal are men, that ~100% of people getting oil out of the ground are men, that ~100% of people felling, dragging and loading trees are men? And on top of that, I'll ask whether it concerns you at all that white men have such a low level of representation in higher education now, that in some places they qualify for minority status? That their representation in a number of white collar, well-compensated, air-conditioned office jobs is in low single digit percent? >while beacons of capitalism like Amazon hide behind terms like "meritocracy" that happen to put forward the interests of only part of the people involved. The core concept of the civil rights movement is now something you put in quotes and speak of with disdain. The irony.
smartsystems 7y ago
I am super upset about what the left did to Star Trek. You want more Africans? Then get at least somebody from Africa. But I guess that's a little too real. I mean they are only 17% of the world population. You want a female captain? How about the much loved captain Janeway? Also, where are all the Mexicans? Where are all the Indians? Based on that alone Star Trek is ignoring 50% of the population. It seems the show has become nothing nothing more than a vehicle for the left wing.
jl2718 7y ago
Both of you sound silly. There is no meritocracy nor equality. People get what they get because they have something that somebody else wants: knowledge, skills, connections, whatever. How did they get it? I don’t know. Maybe by hard work, maybe by ingenuity, maybe by risk, maybe by birth, maybe by luck, maybe by theft, maybe by deceit. None of those things are or can be or ever will be equally-distributed. I personally think that a society that encourages the first two tends to work out better than some of the others, but still probably unrealistic.

gacklesmom 7y ago

Didn't take long for the men's rights crowd to show up with their funky fresh brand of sexism.

exolymph 7y ago
I'm a woman, and he's right. Care to answer the question directly — are you worried about the lack of women loggers, or do you only care about the high status jobs? If so, real big think moment right there. Wonder why that might be.