EPTedit: and the salary level has also been explained with the fact that many women want to be in lower paid jobs such as hairdressers, clothing shop assistants etc.
Hjernevask (Brainwash) Science Documentary - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Deadlifter
Norway68 Posts
edit: and the salary level has also been explained with the fact that many women want to be in lower paid jobs such as hairdressers, clothing shop assistants etc. | ||
|
Chromodoris
Sweden136 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:11 Pantythief wrote: "Cowardly implying that I'm wrong.", that's cute. No, thank you, though! Answer him instead of calling what he said cute if you have to post a response. I think Sunprince is right. Norway, and Sweden where I live, are feminist strongholds and I agree that some social sciences ("genusvetenskap" or gender studies in particular) are based of ideology rather than proof and science. I know plenty of girls that say that there is no difference between the genders other than the reproductive organs and they are actually supported by the gender studies. When you show them real scientific research proving them wrong they shrug it of and say that the research is biased just as it's shown in the first documentary. Sure the researchers might have a hypothesis at the start but if it is proven wrong it's acknowledged immediately. | ||
|
Frigo
Hungary1023 Posts
On April 08 2012 06:28 sunprince wrote: People who don't want responsibility for their actions. One of the central tenets of feminist ideology is that you can't blame women for anything whatsoever. If women chose not to make as much money than men (e.g. working less, choosing easier/safer professions, etc.), then you would have to accept the wage gap or glass ceiling as legitimate. Same goes for other things like why there are more men in engineering. Feminists insist that society is to blame because it allows them to demand things like affirmative action for women, quotas for female politicians, etc. Not that this would be wrong if the idea of society's responsibility was based on empirical science, but feminists abandoned science long ago. Ironically, the notion that women don't have the ability to make their own decisions but are instead purely the product of social conditioning is one of the most regressive, misogynistic notions I can possibly concieve of. It completely denies women their agency and feeds into the traditional script that men are the actors, while women are merely acted upon. Of course, feminist inconsistency and sexism against both men and women isn't exactly news. This is an excellent post and sums up my views on the feminist idea of female (ir)responsibility. When one half of the population is not responsible for their own mistakes and failures and the other half is blamed instead under the guise of misogyny, patriarchy, daddy issues; when one half enjoys freedom from any consequence and the other half is notoriously over-criminalized; when one half is not striving enough and the other half is dragged down instead; you have a fundamentally broken society. On April 08 2012 06:21 sunprince wrote: Reality begs to differ. Hell, you require all companies to have at least 40% female board members, and shut down businesses which don't comply. Of course, this runs counter to the feminist narrative of oppression and victimization, so they'll still insist that Norway is a horribly misogynistic patriarchy. You gotta wonder when will they introduce a similar bill to have at least 40% female garbage collectors huh? | ||
|
Deadlifter
Norway68 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:29 Frigo wrote: You gotta wonder when will they introduce a similar bill to have at least 40% female garbage collectors huh? This made me lol. Give us equality in all areas except the shitty ones! | ||
|
gruff
Sweden2276 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:24 Deadlifter wrote: I don't know of that many other countries that have laws requiring 40% of a board of a private company to be female. It's a pretty absurd hybrid of feminism and communism enforcing such laws on a company that isn't even owned by the state. edit: and the salary level has also been explained with the fact that many women want to be in lower paid jobs such as hairdressers, clothing shop assistants etc. Most sane feminist argues against salary inquality in the same profession and not in the large group of men and women all profession included. It's not secret women sometimes get lower salary for doing the same kind of job, often rationalized with the possibility of them getting pregnant and so on. Your and one of the poster earlier are strawmanning that issue a bit. I'm not saying I neccesarily argree with that point but at least address the real points. | ||
|
goldendwarf
Canada170 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:29 Frigo wrote: You gotta wonder when will they introduce a similar bill to have at least 40% female garbage collectors huh? This. also 40% women in military, and maybe make women face mandatory military service in countries that do it like south korea. | ||
|
Roe
Canada6002 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:03 sunprince wrote: Feminist ideology holds that we all live in an unjust patriarchy that oppresses women, and all men benefit from a unidirectional set of privileges solely due to being male. As a result, feminists will tell you that making things equal for men is definitely not a priority since women have it so much worse, and any advantages that women appear to have are more than outweight by the tons of advantages that men have. This part actually makes a lot of sense. Although the one thing they do have is looks. I know plenty of women who merely get hired for low paying waitress-type jobs because they look good. The thing is conservatives love expanding groups to fit their agenda. They'll talk about feminist extremists that push for insane policies, and then when you say 'hey, maybe men do have an easier time in life' you're branded as supporting the insane policies. This is the case for feminism, as when you ask someone if they want equal opportunities for men and women, and no unjust discrimination against women, they'll assume that's feminism and say yes. Then conservatives talk about the reactionary ideas and brand the two together to make any decent conversation about the topic go out the window. So you're right, ideologies in the feminist debate have taken over any meaningful science. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:47 gruff wrote: \Most sane feminist argues against salary inquality in the same profession and not in the large group of men and women all profession included. It's not secret women sometimes get lower salary for doing the same kind of job, often rationalized with the possibility of them getting pregnant. Your and one of the poster earlier are strawmanning that issue a bit. I'm not saying I neccesarily argree with that point but at least address the real points. No. Feminists often cite the bullshit statistic that women make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. Where does that number come from? The unadjusted wage gap, which simply compares the median male income to the median female income with no adjusting whatsoever. In reality, the US Department of Labor found that once you adjust for relevant factors, there is no statistically significant wage gap. Simply put, the wage gap is a bullshit myth that feminists use to justify their sexist policies. | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
| ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:53 Roe wrote: This part actually makes a lot of sense. Although the one thing they do have is looks. Women have far more privileges than merely looks. Here's a partial list of female privileges: As a woman: 1. I have a much lower chance of being murdered than a man. 2. I have a much lower chance of being driven to successfully commit suicide than a man. 3. I have a lower chance of being a victim of a violent assault than a man. 4. I have probably been taught that it is acceptable to cry. 5. I will probably live longer than the average man. 6. Society probably won't see my overall worthiness as a person being exclusively tied to how high up in the hierarchy I rise. 7. I have a much better chance of being considered to be a worthy mate, even if I’m unemployed with little money, than a man. 8. I am given much greater latitude to form close, intimate friendships than a man is. 9. My chance of suffering a work-related injury or illness is significantly lower than a man’s. 10. My chance of being killed on the job is a tiny fraction of a man’s. 11. If I shy away from fights, it is unlikely that this will damage my status or call into question my worthiness as a sex partner. 12. If I lack the capacity for violence, this generally won't be seen as a damning personal deficiency. 13. If I was born in North America since WWII, my genitals were almost certainly not mutilated soon after birth, without anesthesia. 14. If I attempt to hug a friend in joy, it’s much less likely that my friend will wonder about my sexuality or pull away in unease. 15. If I seek a hug in solace from a close friend, I’ll have much less concern about how they will interpret it or whether my worthiness as a member of my gender will be called into question. 16. I generally am not compelled by the rules of my sex to wear emotional armor in interactions with most people. 17. I am frequently the emotional center of my family. 18. I am allowed to wear clothes that signify ‘vulnerability’, ‘playful openness’, and ’softness’. 19. I am allowed to BE vulnerable, playful, and soft without calling my worthiness as a human being into question. 20. If I interact with other people’s children, I do not have to worry much about the interaction being misinterpreted. 21. I have a much greater chance than a man does of having a sympathetic audience to discuss the unreasonableness of gender demands. 22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man. 23. From my late teens through menopause, it's easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than for a man. 24. My role in my child’s life is generally seen as more important than the child’s father’s role. On April 08 2012 07:53 Roe wrote: The thing is conservatives love expanding groups to fit their agenda. They'll talk about feminist extremists that push for insane policies, and then when you say 'hey, maybe men do have an easier time in life' you're branded as supporting the insane policies. This is the case for feminism, as when you ask someone if they want equal opportunities for men and women, and no unjust discrimination against women, they'll assume that's feminism and say yes. Then conservatives talk about the reactionary ideas and brand the two together to make any decent conversation about the topic go out the window. So you're right, ideologies in the feminist debate have taken over any meaningful science. I agree, there are plenty of ideologies on both sides of many debates, instead of actual science and logic. | ||
|
Nevermind86
Somalia429 Posts
Tbh feminism seems a little bit like the racism between 'light' and 'blacker' african americans that Malcolm X describes. It wouldn't exist if they learned to appreciate themselves for what they are, Malcolm X says that any social group that doesn't appreciate itself there cannot progress, I don't know if it's entirely true but living in Latin america it seems true sometimes. | ||
|
gruff
Sweden2276 Posts
On April 08 2012 07:55 sunprince wrote: No. Feminists often cite the bullshit statistic that women make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. Where does that number come from? The unadjusted wage gap, which simply compares the median male income to the median female income with no adjusting whatsoever. In reality, the US Department of Labor found that once you adjust for relevant factors, there is no statistically significant wage gap. Simply put, the wage gap is a bullshit myth that feminists use to justify their sexist policies. Yes. As I said, I'm not arguing for or against but you are strawmanning the issue when you bring up wage equality across professions since that is not what most notable feminist get hung up about. Also I read the summary of that pdf and it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be (it's certainly not the "simply put" you use to discount any counter arguement). It says the factors accont for the majority but not neccesarily all unequality. I agree that most feminist use bullshit stats though, but that doesn't neccesarily mean every point they are arguing is bullshit. | ||
|
Morpheus.EU
Netherlands26 Posts
| ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On April 08 2012 08:07 gruff wrote: As I said, I'm not arguing for or against but you are strawmanning the issue when you bring up wage equality across professions since that is not what most notable feminist get hung up about. Except I'm not strawmanning it. The bullshit I'm calling out is exactly what feminists get hung up about. Take a look at the website for the National Committee on Pay Equity (NCPE), a major feminist policy organization. Notice the bullshit wage gap stat I mentioned in the first paragraph of their homepage? On April 08 2012 08:07 gruff wrote: Also I read the summary of that pdf and it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. It says the factors accont for the majority but not neccesarily all unequality. The authors specifically note that the remaining inequality is most likely due to additional unadjusted factors such as work experience and job tenure (which we know can't possibly be small factors). The whole point is that the authors concluded "this study leads to the unambiguous conclusion that the differences in the compensation of men and women are the result of a multitude of factors and that the raw wage gap should not be used as the basis to justify corrective action." They also reiterate my point that "the raw wage gap continues to be used in misleading ways to advance public policy agendas without fully explaining the reasons behind the gap," though they leave out the fact that it's feminists who are responsible for this. On April 08 2012 08:07 gruff wrote: I agree that most feminist use bullshit stats though, but that doesn't neccesarily mean every point they are arguing is bullshit. No, but their overall ideology is flawed, toxic, and morally bankrupt. It's past time to leave it behind and embrace a scientific, rather than ideological, way of gender thinking that emphasizes true egalitarianism. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
So, um, what does any of this have to do with the OP; anyhow? | ||
|
nam nam
Sweden4672 Posts
On April 08 2012 08:19 Conti wrote: There's reasonable criticism of feminism, and then there's just plain sexism. Some of the above clearly falls into the latter category. Hell, gender inequality was blatantly obvious for thousands of years up until 30-40 years ago. It should be equally obvious that such a short time is not enough to get rid of said gender inequality, even if we as as culture did make huge steps towards it. We're not quite there yet, though. So, um, what does any of this have to do with the OP; anyhow? If you watch the documentary you'll probably find out. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On April 08 2012 08:19 Conti wrote: There's reasonable criticism of feminism, and then there's just plain sexism. Some of the above clearly falls into the latter category. Prove it. Give me a specific example of the criticisms of feminism I've provided in this thread and how it's sexist. On April 08 2012 08:19 Conti wrote: So, um, what does any of this have to do with the OP; anyhow? Who do you think is one of the main parties responsible for the brainwashing described by the documentary? | ||
|
Rockztar
Denmark210 Posts
On April 08 2012 06:21 sunprince wrote: Reality begs to differ. Hell, you require all companies to have at least 40% female board members, and shut down businesses which don't comply. Of course, this runs counter to the feminist narrative of oppression and victimization, so they'll still insist that Norway is a horribly misogynistic patriarchy. So because you've read a single artist in New York times you're suddenly an expert on the subject? Gotta say man you come off as quite a bit ignorant. It gave me a good laugh though. :p I don't think you understand Scandinavian culture in the slightest and should probably stop making comments on it. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Conti
Germany2516 Posts
On April 08 2012 08:22 sunprince wrote: Prove it. Give me a specific example of the criticisms of feminism I've provided in this thread and how it's sexist. Sure: 13. If I was born in North America since WWII, my genitals were almost certainly not mutilated soon after birth, without anesthesia. Implying that male circumcision is some kind of "mutilation" is just dumb. Doing so in a list purportedly listing the things some women do not have to suffer is just fucking offensive, as female circumcision actually is mutilation and forced upon women in many countries in the world still. Who do you think is one of the main parties responsible for the brainwashing described by the documentary? I haven't seen the entire documentary (have you?), but according to the titles of the episodes, gender inequality makes up 1/7th of the issue, not 100% as you seem to imply.  | ||
|
AutomatonOmega
United States706 Posts
| ||
| ||
