4 ms·

>What's your proof that such prejudices exist This guys has a point. Yea women where is the proof that you are prejudiced against except centuries of discrimin

by prayag 13y ago

>What's your proof that such prejudices exist This guys has a point. Yea women where is the proof that you are prejudiced against except centuries of discrimination? The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Almost 50 years ago. The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. Also, feminism is bad. \sarcasm >I assume most who think events like this are destructive -- would answer that fairness and equality relate to negative freedom: the freedom from someone restraining you from pursuing your goals i.e. we would all be more equal if the only thing which stood between us and our goals were our own skill (or lack thereof). Because this argument assumes a level playing field for everybody including no intrinsic factors like lack of role models, lack of representation and lack of societal support. Here's another advice for you, what you are thinking are well-reasoned arguments are all the same arguments that come up time and again in Sociology 101 to being stated in every argument on gender and race related issues on Hacker News. So, go do some research make some new (but probably) misinformed arguments about how we live in a post-gender society instead rehashing the same bigoted crap all the time.

Dewie 13y ago
> The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Women got the right to vote at a federal level in Switzerland in 1971. > The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. No. You talk about sociology 101, so how about this nugget; making less money than someone has many more variables associated with it than discrimination (for example; part time vs. full time). This is practically an urban myth at this point. You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones.
- prayag 13y ago
  > This is practically an urban myth at this point. You are wrong. It's not clear-cut. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap for an introduction. Are you suggesting that women are not prejudiced again in work-place and in technology? > You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones. I did. Here's what I found: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253 https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253
  - ameister14 13y ago
    Actually if you look at the US office of government accountability study, you'd see a completely different view. Considering that the two cited articles are from 1993 and 1999 respectively, it might be worth it to attach more weight to a wide ranging government study from 2009. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09279.pdf http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09279.pdf
    - adrienne 13y ago
      Two things about this study: First, it only covers people in government jobs. Second, the title of the study is "Gender Pay Gap in the Federal Workforce Narrows..." meaning there IS STILL a gender pay gap. And if you read the study, about 7 cents worth of the gap was unexplained by any of the factors they analyzed. So okay, women don't make $0.77 for every dollar men earn. If we discard all the stuff the GAO found that definitely isn't related, women make $0.93 for every dollar men earn. So, is that somehow okay because it's "only" 7 cents?
      - ameister14 13y ago
        Nope, I'm just drawing your attention to the fact that it's narrowed from (the previously) stated 77 cents, and that perhaps the issue needs to be examined from a new perspective in order to continue to achieve returns. As the previous studies cited were a 1993 study and a 1999 study covering Sweden, I thought it might be important to add some modern statistics into the mix. The interesting part to me is on pages 84-86. If you look, you'll see the pay gap resulting from characteristics such as experience, difference in education, and difference in occupation (the three most usually cited to explain the wage gap) have narrowed significantly. This is important because it showcases a societal shift in workforce population, from a 'glass ceiling' problem to a far more difficult one that is harder to define and fix.

by prayag 13y ago

Dewie 13y ago

> The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Women got the right to vote at a federal level in Switzerland in 1971. > The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. No. You talk about sociology 101, so how about this nugget; making less money than someone has many more variables associated with it than discrimination (for example; part time vs. full time). This is practically an urban myth at this point. You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones.

prayag 13y ago
> This is practically an urban myth at this point. You are wrong. It's not clear-cut. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap for an introduction. Are you suggesting that women are not prejudiced again in work-place and in technology? > You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones. I did. Here's what I found: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253 https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253
- ameister14 13y ago
  Actually if you look at the US office of government accountability study, you'd see a completely different view. Considering that the two cited articles are from 1993 and 1999 respectively, it might be worth it to attach more weight to a wide ranging government study from 2009. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09279.pdf http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09279.pdf
  - adrienne 13y ago
    Two things about this study: First, it only covers people in government jobs. Second, the title of the study is "Gender Pay Gap in the Federal Workforce Narrows..." meaning there IS STILL a gender pay gap. And if you read the study, about 7 cents worth of the gap was unexplained by any of the factors they analyzed. So okay, women don't make $0.77 for every dollar men earn. If we discard all the stuff the GAO found that definitely isn't related, women make $0.93 for every dollar men earn. So, is that somehow okay because it's "only" 7 cents?
    - ameister14 13y ago
      Nope, I'm just drawing your attention to the fact that it's narrowed from (the previously) stated 77 cents, and that perhaps the issue needs to be examined from a new perspective in order to continue to achieve returns. As the previous studies cited were a 1993 study and a 1999 study covering Sweden, I thought it might be important to add some modern statistics into the mix. The interesting part to me is on pages 84-86. If you look, you'll see the pay gap resulting from characteristics such as experience, difference in education, and difference in occupation (the three most usually cited to explain the wage gap) have narrowed significantly. This is important because it showcases a societal shift in workforce population, from a 'glass ceiling' problem to a far more difficult one that is harder to define and fix.