Woolly Blue
Player Valuation: £80m
If anyone posts a pic of Hillary wide spread they're likely to be banned.
H. Clinton
- Thread starter summerisle
- Start date
- Status
blue4eva77
Yarmolenko ? Yes please
how long for mate ?
Woolly Blue
Player Valuation: £80m
blue4eva77
Yarmolenko ? Yes please
Bungle
Player Valuation: £90m
Are we ok if she's wearing a Stars and Stripes mankini type thing?
Woolly Blue
Player Valuation: £80m
4 and a random thread ban or two on your return ?
You're just being silly
dead_soft
Player Valuation: £35m
Yes it does.
Not by women. By other men. Women's main threat is other men. Sexual violence is part of a sexually aggressive culture created by men and aimed at women
blue4eva77
Yarmolenko ? Yes please
SNova
Player Valuation: £15m
Are we talking about the west here? If we are;
No it does not.
Men are much more likely to be attacked than women.
Sexually aggressive culture? Are you talking about cat calling or rape? You can't teach someone not to rape.
"In the US, children that come from homes with more bathrooms get into better colleges and universities." Clearly, having more bathrooms in your house produces better educational outcomes.
All data have context. What are the relevant questions being asked of this "average pay gap"?
Are there/were there differences in education, or career choices? (see generational gap)
Are these the same now as before? Are these the result of discrimination or some other factor?
Do these numbers take into account years spent outside the workforce, and how that influences pay scale?
Do these numbers take into account differences in types of career pursued?
I'm not suggesting that discrimination does not exist, but these numbers on their own simply don't support it. Tell me that hourly wages for plumbers with 10+ years experience shows that women get paid 75% what men make. That suggests sex-based discrimination. Don't tell me simply that average hourly wages for all women are lower.
The lovely Mrs Nigh spent 10 years teaching at a local esteemed institution of higher education before leaving to be simply a "mom." When she decides to return to that job, she faces a likely lower salary than her male peers that did not take time away from their careers to raise children. That doesn't mean she's unqualified for the job, and it doesn't necessarily mean she's being actively discriminated against (although unintentional discrimination can be just as damaging.)
There is better data available on this topic than "average weekly salary." Support the claim with good data, not bad data.
If the current data on unemployment, education, and suicide/depression for young men were applied to women, they'd find a crisis all of a sudden.
Interesting that if you run the gender disparity in earnings numbers on the staffs of the politicians advancing the discrimination argument, you'll find that they are at or beyond the levels of gender impact seen on average. That said, women good / men bad. That's all you need to remember, and are you Ready for Hillary!!!???
Two and a half Billion dollars they're going to spend on this. Can't wait.
We're talking about gender pay disparity as a total. Obviously, some jobs men take more than women that pay more at this moment in time, but that doesn't account for a 20% pay gap overall. In fact, it highlights the problem, as it means that jobs women traditionally do are valued less than those men do.
There is no better overarching set of data for this discussion than the pay gap as a whole - what is the pay a plumber receives got to do with the rest of the population?
Your view on it is really, really strange tbh
Men are more likely to be attacked than women as they involve themselves much more often in high risk activity, such as drug dealing and so on.
Are you trying to say men are killed/raped for being men as often as women are killed/raped for being women, or can't you see the distinction?
My view is that it's bad math(s).
Gender pay disparity has a lot of causes. Some of it is no doubt discrimination, some of it is no doubt not discrimination. Don't lump it together and call it all discrimination.
These affect workplace earnings: education, experience/time in workforce, career pursued, discrimination. Some of these can be affected by a woman's desire to parent her children, if she exits the workforce to do so. Or if she picks a career (teaching*) that more aptly fits her needs as a mother than other professions (lawyer/barrister*).
Comparing like to like (apples to apples or plumbers to plumbers) will provide interesting and useful data. Looking at average weekly earnings is neither interesting nor useful.
*in US 76% of public teachers are female, roughly 45% of lawyers are female (although many more females exit the labor force; lawyers make more than teachers, so on average men will make more than women when comparing all educators and lawyers. While discrimination may exist in these industries, the fact that average earnings is different does not suggest discrimination.
More from the 2nd linked article:
But women are much more likely to drop out of these professions (and others). Among early-career professionals—people ages 25 to 44—who list their most recent jobs as doctor or lawyer, you can see that women are much more likely to be out of the labor force:
With the kind of dropout rates that produce these disparities, we would need much more than 50 percent female in the graduating classes to reach equal representation in these professions.
In Mitchell's report, the economist Claudia Goldin, who has recently investigatedwomen's success as pharmacists, argues that the corporatization of medicine has helped women by introducing the concept of work-family balance, and reducing the gender earnings gap—all changes that helped women in pharmacies as well. But I don't see the evidence that such practices have yet changed the medical industry enough to reduce the gender differences in drop-out rates. And the research evidence shows that explicit diversity policies—with teeth—often are necessary to break the logjam.
And Mitchell's story did not mention any efforts to reduce the segregation of men and women—especially in medicine—into different specialties. That segregation is a big part of what drives the earnings gap among doctors and lawyers. Here are the median earnings by age for doctors and lawyers, from the same source:
At the peak of that curve—ages 45 to 50—female doctors are earning just 62 percent of men's median earnings. As they make their decisions about whether to enter the field, and how to specialize, and how to handle their family demands and opportunities, these disparities in representation and rewards come into play. The decisions men and women in these professions make should never be seen as free choices unconstrained or unaffected by the institutional environment.
SNova
Player Valuation: £15m
Men are more likely to be attacked in general. I.e just walking home at night.
And no I understand that and the people that do that are messed up. That doesn't prove that we live in a sexist society.
If we lived in a society that was sexist towards women breast cancer would not have as much funding (more people are diagnosed with prostate cancer), women would serve longer sentences (they serve less for the same crime), men would win more custody etc. Etc.
Society is not sexist towards women in the West in 2015. That doesn't mean there aren't some sexists, but that goes for men and women.
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
