I will never not be mad about sexism (and any other ism) and I think our friendship will be a lot more fruitful if you got a little angry about those kinds of things too.
How about we get angry about Feminism?
don’t let losers with nickelback autoplay on their blog tell you shit
Oh wow, she called me a loser and insulted my music. I feel so defeated now.
that was not feminism, child. that was me telling you to leave me alone.
I’m not gonna waste my time arguing with someone who thinks feminism or any other social activism is irrelevant in a world with a white male majority in almost every government, despite the fact they don’t actually make up that much of the population. A world where bodily autonomy of women is constantly threatened. Where the wage gap is still 20 cents to the dollar for white women and more for people of color. I could go on forever really but you’re really not worth that much time. No matter what I say it’s gonna be “omg feminist so bad” so bye.
>a white male majority in almost every government
Oh yes, I’m sure nearly every country in South America, Africa, and Asia are run by mostly white men, right? Or did you forget for a minute that governments exist outside of western society?
>A world where bodily autonomy of women is constantly threatened.
And a world where men have virtually no bodily autonomy at all. In America men have to sign up for the draft just to be able to vote. Boys who are victims of statutory rape by a woman can be forced to pay child support to their rapist.
>Where the wage gap is still 20 cents to the dollar for white women and more for people of color.
How wrong are you about this? Let me count the ways!
Oh and a few other things, semi-related to the wage gap:
*I’m so sorry to my followers. Usually I ignore crap like this but for some reason I can’t today. After this I’ll stop reblogging this post.*
> I should have said white/ men. Really it’s an issue of wording which you will undoubtedly blow out of proportion. Have fun.
> While that is a horrible thing to happen to that boy, it’s not the norm. The amount of women denied rights to their own bodies outnumbers bizarre cases like the one you linked too much to count. That boy was a victim of the backfiring of the patriarchy. It’s the idea that men want sex no matter what that led to a ruling like that and that idea is pushed by the patriarchy. Even the first line of the article says “He was a 15-year-old kid with all the usual teenage sexual passions." It insinuates right off the bat that he wanted it. Rape is rape and it’s the patriarchy that says rape is invalid if a woman does it. That’s the kind of thing feminism works against.
> The first three links (which I’m assuming are your best, because why else would they be in the top three?) are all to opinion articles that try to explain away the effects of the wage gap. Forgive me if I choose not to read the rest. The wage gap is there. There is no denying it. You try to rationalized that it’s meaningless all you want but that won’t make it disappear and it certainly won’t make it okay with the people affected by it. Look! I can count too!
Twenty four (this is the census)
Here you have your pick of .org .gov .com and PDFs to keep you occupied. I could go on but let’s switch to some handy visuals.
Good bye and good day.
And yet not a single one of your links accounts for the following when comparing wages earned:
Hours worked (men make up 60% of all hours worked, just fyi)
Jobs taken (men take the more dangerous jobs, accounting for 95% of workplace deaths as well)
This report, which is actually giving evidence for the wage gap, happens to explain exactly why it shows up, on page 18. Taken from the report:
"One in four women employees (28.6%) worked in public services in 2006, compared to just less than one in five men (17.3%). The better-paid professional and managerial jobs in the business sector and, indeed, many of the higher-level jobs in the public sector are still held mainly by men.
In 2006, four in ten men (39.7%) were still in blue-collar jobs.42 While by no means all well-paid, these kinds of jobs do tend to command above average pay, and are often unionized. In 2006, by contrast, just 7.7% of women were employed in these blue-collar jobs, one-fifth the proportion of men.
This small minority of women are mainly to be found in relatively low-paid manufacturing jobs in sectors like clothing. By contrast, one-quarter of women (24.1%) are still in non-professional office jobs - that is in clerical, administrative, and secretarial jobs - compared to just 7.1% of men. Many of these jobs are quite skilled, but they tend to pay less than skilled blue-collar jobs.
Both men and women work in low-paid, often part-time, sales and service
jobs. But, more women are employed in these lower-end jobs than are men, explaining why women are much more likely to be low-paid than men. More than one in four women (28.6%) worked in these occupations in 2006 compared to one in five men (19.3%), and the men who work in these kinds of jobs tend to be younger workers.
Turning to professional occupations, which require formal post-secondary education and qualifications, women now hold a significant edge over men. Almost one in three women (32.5%) work in these kinds of jobs, a much higher proportion than for men (22.9%).But, women are significantly more likely to work in professional jobs in public and social services: in health care, social services, government and teaching.
In 2006, women accounted for 55.9% of all professional jobs, but 87.4% of jobs in nursing, therapy and other health related professional jobs; 71.3% of professional social sciences and religion jobs (most in public and not-for-profit social services); and 63.9% of teaching jobs.46 Of the 32.5% of all women who are professionals, two in three are employed in these predominantly public sector/female-dominated occupations.
By contrast, the majority of professional men are to be found in business/finance and natural sciences/engineering/mathematics occupations in the private sector (where women account for just 22.0% of employment), and still account for about half of all professional jobs in business and finance.”
This here is not an opinion piece. These are facts. These facts state, among other things, that women are more likely to work in low-paid, part time jobs, than men.
I’m probably going to regret getting involved in this, but I would like to point out that all the information is well and good, but it doesn’t actually address the point. Sure, those are the immediate causes of the wage gap. What feminism as a movement attempts to do is ask why women end up in lower paid jobs.
You can argue all you want for men being bigger risk-takers or women being more nurturing or whatever you want, but those are just pop-Darwinism theories with no real backing.
Do you really think women want to work fewer hours? The balance ends up that way in large part because women are still saddled with the majority of childcare.
Do you think women are naturally not interested in technology? Or is it maybe the systematic way they’re discriminated against in the education system and the workplace.
The points you made are true; they just don’t question why they’re true. Feminism isn’t about the individual woman’s choice but rather how the system treats women.
Lets take an example from Sweden.
Now, Sweden has the lowest score on the Gini Coefficient, a measuring tool for how “equal” a country is. This makes it, arguably, the most equal country in the world.
In Sweden, they have made multiple attempts to encourage women to go into fields that are male dominated, and to also encourage men to go into fields that are female dominated. These efforts work for a short time, usually around 2 years. After that, the numbers return to their previous positions.
When a short documentary was made about this, the reporter went into a nursing office, which has no women in it, and asked them why they chose nursing over say, engineering or something tech related.
Their answers were, simply, that those jobs seemed boring. That they liked their jobs as nurses because they enjoyed talking to people.
Now, obviously we can’t simply take this and say it applies to everything. But it does give us a starting point. Why exactly is this belief that women don’t go into certain fields because of “discrimination” pushed so hard? Especially when, in a country with arguably the least discrimination, it is simply their choice not to go into those fields.
To me it seems like we should be asking people why they don’t want to go into certain job fields, rather than simply assuming that we already know.
Women ending up with child care is not the fault of discrimination. It is actually the fault of an age-old doctrine. The Tender Years Doctrine, to be exact. It was instituted by Feminists in the late 1800s, and it said that it was in the best interests of the child to be in the mother’s custody until at least age 7. Later, this would be changed to age 17.
This doctrine, though it has technically been replaced by the courts simply deciding custody based on “the best interests of the child”, still influences the decision of custody cases today. Leading to the end result of women receiving child custody in over 90% of divorce cases.
Women are in no way discriminated against in the Education system. In fact, they receive more benefits than men.
Women receive the majority of scholarships, the majority of bachelor’s degrees, and have more of their very own women-only colleges. Women of all races, are more likely to graduate college than a man of the same race.
In addition, the school system has been shown to be biased against boys. This bias starts as early as kindergarten. Here’s a couple more articles on the subject (One, Two).
Finally, when you compare a man and woman with the same job, similar backgrounds, same hours worked, and who have been working at the job for the same length of time, the wage gap narrows down almost to the point of nonexistence. The only reason that it persists after this is because men are more likely to ask for a raise than women.