5 ms·

I think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions. All sorts of things could happen in the classroom. For example,

I think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions. All sorts of things could happen in the classroom. For example, maybe boys raise their finger more often to ask questions (no idea, just an example). That could be a reason for "teachers giving them more time and space". No theory of discrimination necessary. Or maybe boys are dumber and need more help than girls - another possible way to explain the measurements without calling for discrimination. But "feminist scientists" (deliberate ") WANT to see discrimination. As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made. For example, in the wage gap discussion, I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. Who knows, there might be some surprising answers.

e12e 13y ago
> think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions. I'm afraid researchers in general are far to prone to jumping to conclusions. > As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made. That's not my experience with such research. On the contrary, there are usually a progression: first look at the statistical data to see if there appear to be differences, and if there are, then try and find out more about those differences, why they are there and if they can and/or should be mitigated. A lot of the work in classrooms, for instance, first started with documenting classroom settings on video, looking at the amount of time spent with various students and how often one or another group was picked to answer questions etc. This work revealed rather stark differences, much to the surprise of teachers who subjectively thought themselves to not do any sort of differentiation. Now, explaining those differences is indeed complex. And while I don't think there is any support for the idea that boys are dumber than girls (or vice versa) -- there are indeed studies suggesting that young boys have a harder time learning and concentrating in a quiet "at-the-desk" classroom setting. This then has implications for how one should organize class; in general you don't want noisy students to distract those that are more quiet/more mature -- nor might you want to segregate the classroom too much. > For example, in the wage gap discussion, I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. Who knows, there might be some surprising answers. That amounts to asking employers why they are breaking the law, which makes it a little tricky. In general there are three important questions here: do women earn the same as men (no); are women paid the same amount for the same work as men (no, but the difference is smaller -- especially now than in the 60s); And: Why? The answer to why is also a two-part answer: partly women do more of the work that is considered free (or very low wage when people are hired to do it): housework and staying at home with children. Additionally, due to women being overrepresented in careers with lower wages, in a typical family, it makes more economic sense for the woman to stay home with young (and/or sick) children -- which again means the woman might progress slower in her career. To cut an already too long comment short, have a look at for example: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-21/equal-pay-plaintiffs-burden-of-proof http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-21/equal-pay-pl... http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/09/1839281/on-equal-pay-day-why-women-are-paid-less-than-men/ http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/09/1839281/on-equal...
- facepalm 13y ago
  "That amounts to asking employers why they are breaking the law, which makes it a little tricky" Maybe you haven't noticed, but you are already assuming that employers are guilty. That kind of thing is exactly what makes me speak out against feminist articles all the time, because there are so many unspoken assumptions. What if they aren't and there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for them paying less to women? Are there even employers who pay their female employees less than the males? Perhaps it is rather a difference between companies? (Just examples). What if the women just work less hours than the men (which seems to be the case)? I think the answer to the wage gap has more than just two parts. Also I suspect most wage gap studies neglect to mention that women automatically get half of their husbands income. Edit: to answer one of your arguments, women more likely to stay home because they have lower wages. What if they chose a profession with lower wages because they knew they'd be staying home anyway? Or maybe they chose a less paid, but more fun job, because they don't need to provide for the whole family? You probably automatically assume it is a problem. But what if it is a privilege instead? What if instead of measuring "wage", we would measure "time spent with children and family"? See how you are being manipulated? Of course everybody may decide for themselves what they prefer (work or time with family), but it seems wrong to just assume those preferences for all of mankind. I suspect a lot of feminists don't have children yet, so they don't even know what it means. To me, having witnessed my wife toiling in labor for hours, it seems ridiculous to send a woman right back to work after having given birth to her child. Of course she should have the privilege to spend time with her children - she sacrificed the most to have them in the first place. What makes me angry is if this privilege is then turned on it's head and the people who toil to make it possible (ie men earning the money to support the family) are then being blamed for it. Again - everybody may choose their own preferences. I am just saying that the preferences we see today may not be completely arbitrary. Most people end up having children after all - nothing against the ones who don't want to have children, but they simply don't make a significant impact in the long run. They die, and then that's it.
  - aestra 13y ago
    >What if the women just work less hours than the men (which seems to be the case)? >women more likely to stay home because they have lower wages. What if they chose a profession with lower wages because they knew they'd be staying home anyway? Or maybe they chose a less paid, but more fun job, because they don't need to provide for the whole family? If you ever even paid attention to such studies you are trying to debunk you would realize that many take this into consideration and see that there are still differences in pay even though factors like that are taken into consideration very carefully. Even though the wage gap does lessen when those are taken into consideration. >I suspect a lot of feminists don't have children yet, so they don't even know what it means. Of course that is absurd. My mother is a feminist. Then I just Wikipediaed list of feminist and it was not at ALL hard to find a bunch with children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Frank_Ward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Frank_Ward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Najimy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Najimy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Ohly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Ohly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Nussbaum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Nussbaum >To me, having witnessed my wife toiling in labor for hours, it seems ridiculous to send a woman right back to work after having given birth to her child Nobody said women need to return to work after giving birth. The whole point of feminism is everyone has a choice to do what they want. They have a choice to go back to work, or stay at home. Or the man or same sex partner can stay at home if they wish too, without any problems. >Also I suspect most wage gap studies neglect to mention that women automatically get half of their husbands income. Of course that isn't what we are taking about. AT ALL. Not even close. We are talking about two people doing exactly the same job and one person getting paid less. Except it is two groups doing the same job and one group getting paid less. These are people who do equally well in their jobs. >Are there even employers who pay their female employees less than the males? Yes. Is it outright "I don't like women?" Probably not. See my last reply to you. >But what if it is a privilege instead? If you actually understood feminism rather than just blindly shot it down you'd understand that feminist just want women and men to be treated as equals. They want men to have the same opportunities to spend time with their children as women and the same opportunities to work as women without societal pressure. It's all up to the choices each individual and family wants to make for themselves. But if a women chooses to do labor in the job market she should be treated as an equal to men. That's all these feminist are saying. if she chooses not to have children, then she should also be respected. People like to think of feminism as something that's a scary monster or something. It is simply the belief that men and women should be treated as equals. Feminism deals with men's issues too when they are unequal to that of women's such as in the realm of child custody.
aestra 13y ago
Here's your answers http://academics.hamilton.edu/government/home/government_375/sp97/Gender_Equity/equity/ge3.html http://academics.hamilton.edu/government/home/government_375... >But "feminist scientists" (deliberate ") WANT to see discrimination. As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made. That's stupid. > I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. There has actually been research into this too. Women don't negotiate as much as men. Women don't ask for promotions and raises as much as men. Women aren't recognized as much for their contributions as much as men. Women's achievements, capabilities and potential are seen as much less than men by society. This starts as young as babies even by their own mothers. Successful and competent women are perceived as unlikeable thus less likely to get a raise or rise in the career ladder. Women tend to have less confidence in their ability and thus might contribute to them not asking for a raise. This is mostly due to subconscious cultural influences and socialization of women rather than outright discrimination. Employers are also worried about a women taking maternity leave and being distracted by kids. They aren't worried about men being distracted by children. http://www.learnvest.com/2012/04/11-things-hiring-managers-wont-tell-you/ http://www.learnvest.com/2012/04/11-things-hiring-managers-w... http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7575.html http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7575.html http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/006/923/Adolph,%20K.,%20Mondschein,%20E.%20R.,%20Tamis-LeMonda,%20C.,%20Journ.%20of%20Experimental%20Child%20Psych.,%202000.pdf http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/006/923/Adolph,%... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-business/10269461/As-a-boss-maternity-leave-is-a-nightmare-for-employers.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-business/10269461/As... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/08/13/why-women-still-earn-less-than-men-its-the-kids-fault/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/0... http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/201... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women-scientists-overlooked-dna-history-science/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women... http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-08/ns_slee.html http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-08/ns_slee.html http://www.newsweek.com/why-parents-may-cause-gender-differences-kids-79501 http://www.newsweek.com/why-parents-may-cause-gender-differe... http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles95i.pdf http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles95i.pdf http://www.hrzone.com/topic/strategies/invisible-glass-ceiling-hidden-side-gender-discrimination/133635 http://www.hrzone.com/topic/strategies/invisible-glass-ceili... http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/chapter-9-workplace-bias-18255152 http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/chapter-9-workplace-b... http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2013/09/26/gender-stereotypes-voter-information/ http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2013/09/26/gender-stereotyp... http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691736 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691736 http://nataliemanor.com/articles/leadership-confidence-many-women-are-competent-but-lack-confidence/ http://nataliemanor.com/articles/leadership-confidence-many-... http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/blind-auditions-orchestras-gender-bias http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/b... In a study I can't find now people were given a story about a successful person, some people were given it with a female name and some where given it with a male name. Then they were asked to give adjectives to describe the person. The male name got positive adjectives such as "hard worker" "achiever" and the female name got negative ones like "pushy."

e12e 13y ago

> think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions. I'm afraid researchers in general are far to prone to jumping to conclusions. > As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made. That's not my experience with such research. On the contrary, there are usually a progression: first look at the statistical data to see if there appear to be differences, and if there are, then try and find out more about those differences, why they are there and if they can and/or should be mitigated. A lot of the work in classrooms, for instance, first started with documenting classroom settings on video, looking at the amount of time spent with various students and how often one or another group was picked to answer questions etc. This work revealed rather stark differences, much to the surprise of teachers who subjectively thought themselves to not do any sort of differentiation. Now, explaining those differences is indeed complex. And while I don't think there is any support for the idea that boys are dumber than girls (or vice versa) -- there are indeed studies suggesting that young boys have a harder time learning and concentrating in a quiet "at-the-desk" classroom setting. This then has implications for how one should organize class; in general you don't want noisy students to distract those that are more quiet/more mature -- nor might you want to segregate the classroom too much. > For example, in the wage gap discussion, I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. Who knows, there might be some surprising answers. That amounts to asking employers why they are breaking the law, which makes it a little tricky. In general there are three important questions here: do women earn the same as men (no); are women paid the same amount for the same work as men (no, but the difference is smaller -- especially now than in the 60s); And: Why? The answer to why is also a two-part answer: partly women do more of the work that is considered free (or very low wage when people are hired to do it): housework and staying at home with children. Additionally, due to women being overrepresented in careers with lower wages, in a typical family, it makes more economic sense for the woman to stay home with young (and/or sick) children -- which again means the woman might progress slower in her career. To cut an already too long comment short, have a look at for example: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-21/equal-pay-plaintiffs-burden-of-proof http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-21/equal-pay-pl... http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/09/1839281/on-equal-pay-day-why-women-are-paid-less-than-men/ http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/09/1839281/on-equal...

facepalm 13y ago
"That amounts to asking employers why they are breaking the law, which makes it a little tricky" Maybe you haven't noticed, but you are already assuming that employers are guilty. That kind of thing is exactly what makes me speak out against feminist articles all the time, because there are so many unspoken assumptions. What if they aren't and there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for them paying less to women? Are there even employers who pay their female employees less than the males? Perhaps it is rather a difference between companies? (Just examples). What if the women just work less hours than the men (which seems to be the case)? I think the answer to the wage gap has more than just two parts. Also I suspect most wage gap studies neglect to mention that women automatically get half of their husbands income. Edit: to answer one of your arguments, women more likely to stay home because they have lower wages. What if they chose a profession with lower wages because they knew they'd be staying home anyway? Or maybe they chose a less paid, but more fun job, because they don't need to provide for the whole family? You probably automatically assume it is a problem. But what if it is a privilege instead? What if instead of measuring "wage", we would measure "time spent with children and family"? See how you are being manipulated? Of course everybody may decide for themselves what they prefer (work or time with family), but it seems wrong to just assume those preferences for all of mankind. I suspect a lot of feminists don't have children yet, so they don't even know what it means. To me, having witnessed my wife toiling in labor for hours, it seems ridiculous to send a woman right back to work after having given birth to her child. Of course she should have the privilege to spend time with her children - she sacrificed the most to have them in the first place. What makes me angry is if this privilege is then turned on it's head and the people who toil to make it possible (ie men earning the money to support the family) are then being blamed for it. Again - everybody may choose their own preferences. I am just saying that the preferences we see today may not be completely arbitrary. Most people end up having children after all - nothing against the ones who don't want to have children, but they simply don't make a significant impact in the long run. They die, and then that's it.
- aestra 13y ago
  >What if the women just work less hours than the men (which seems to be the case)? >women more likely to stay home because they have lower wages. What if they chose a profession with lower wages because they knew they'd be staying home anyway? Or maybe they chose a less paid, but more fun job, because they don't need to provide for the whole family? If you ever even paid attention to such studies you are trying to debunk you would realize that many take this into consideration and see that there are still differences in pay even though factors like that are taken into consideration very carefully. Even though the wage gap does lessen when those are taken into consideration. >I suspect a lot of feminists don't have children yet, so they don't even know what it means. Of course that is absurd. My mother is a feminist. Then I just Wikipediaed list of feminist and it was not at ALL hard to find a bunch with children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Frank_Ward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Frank_Ward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Valenti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Najimy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Najimy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Ohly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Ohly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Nussbaum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Nussbaum >To me, having witnessed my wife toiling in labor for hours, it seems ridiculous to send a woman right back to work after having given birth to her child Nobody said women need to return to work after giving birth. The whole point of feminism is everyone has a choice to do what they want. They have a choice to go back to work, or stay at home. Or the man or same sex partner can stay at home if they wish too, without any problems. >Also I suspect most wage gap studies neglect to mention that women automatically get half of their husbands income. Of course that isn't what we are taking about. AT ALL. Not even close. We are talking about two people doing exactly the same job and one person getting paid less. Except it is two groups doing the same job and one group getting paid less. These are people who do equally well in their jobs. >Are there even employers who pay their female employees less than the males? Yes. Is it outright "I don't like women?" Probably not. See my last reply to you. >But what if it is a privilege instead? If you actually understood feminism rather than just blindly shot it down you'd understand that feminist just want women and men to be treated as equals. They want men to have the same opportunities to spend time with their children as women and the same opportunities to work as women without societal pressure. It's all up to the choices each individual and family wants to make for themselves. But if a women chooses to do labor in the job market she should be treated as an equal to men. That's all these feminist are saying. if she chooses not to have children, then she should also be respected. People like to think of feminism as something that's a scary monster or something. It is simply the belief that men and women should be treated as equals. Feminism deals with men's issues too when they are unequal to that of women's such as in the realm of child custody.

aestra 13y ago

Here's your answers http://academics.hamilton.edu/government/home/government_375/sp97/Gender_Equity/equity/ge3.html http://academics.hamilton.edu/government/home/government_375... >But "feminist scientists" (deliberate ") WANT to see discrimination. As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made. That's stupid. > I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. There has actually been research into this too. Women don't negotiate as much as men. Women don't ask for promotions and raises as much as men. Women aren't recognized as much for their contributions as much as men. Women's achievements, capabilities and potential are seen as much less than men by society. This starts as young as babies even by their own mothers. Successful and competent women are perceived as unlikeable thus less likely to get a raise or rise in the career ladder. Women tend to have less confidence in their ability and thus might contribute to them not asking for a raise. This is mostly due to subconscious cultural influences and socialization of women rather than outright discrimination. Employers are also worried about a women taking maternity leave and being distracted by kids. They aren't worried about men being distracted by children. http://www.learnvest.com/2012/04/11-things-hiring-managers-wont-tell-you/ http://www.learnvest.com/2012/04/11-things-hiring-managers-w... http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7575.html http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7575.html http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/006/923/Adolph,%20K.,%20Mondschein,%20E.%20R.,%20Tamis-LeMonda,%20C.,%20Journ.%20of%20Experimental%20Child%20Psych.,%202000.pdf http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/006/923/Adolph,%... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-business/10269461/As-a-boss-maternity-leave-is-a-nightmare-for-employers.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-business/10269461/As... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/08/13/why-women-still-earn-less-than-men-its-the-kids-fault/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/0... http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/201... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women-scientists-overlooked-dna-history-science/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women... http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-08/ns_slee.html http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-08/ns_slee.html http://www.newsweek.com/why-parents-may-cause-gender-differences-kids-79501 http://www.newsweek.com/why-parents-may-cause-gender-differe... http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles95i.pdf http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles95i.pdf http://www.hrzone.com/topic/strategies/invisible-glass-ceiling-hidden-side-gender-discrimination/133635 http://www.hrzone.com/topic/strategies/invisible-glass-ceili... http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/chapter-9-workplace-bias-18255152 http://www.nature.com/scitable/content/chapter-9-workplace-b... http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2013/09/26/gender-stereotypes-voter-information/ http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2013/09/26/gender-stereotyp... http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691736 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1691736 http://nataliemanor.com/articles/leadership-confidence-many-women-are-competent-but-lack-confidence/ http://nataliemanor.com/articles/leadership-confidence-many-... http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/blind-auditions-orchestras-gender-bias http://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/b... In a study I can't find now people were given a story about a successful person, some people were given it with a female name and some where given it with a male name. Then they were asked to give adjectives to describe the person. The male name got positive adjectives such as "hard worker" "achiever" and the female name got negative ones like "pushy."