• Tumblr Debates Freedom of Speech at Oxford, Says You Must Censor Privileged White CIS Men To Achieve
    234 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Ithon;48548143][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtWrljX9HRA[/media] just pop this down right here.[/QUOTE] The video the OP showed gave me a fucking headache. The speaker's thoughts and ideas where not clear. If i heard the word discourse on more time I was gonna break something. This guy speaks, his points are clear and backed with facts. He is right though imo.
[QUOTE=splenda;48546644]Except that republican party became the democratic party of today.[/QUOTE] A bit late but no, the Republican party of today is a direct continuation of the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln and the Democrats are a direct continuation of the Democrats of the same era. The only thing in the history of the GoP that had the word "democratic" in it was the democratic-republican party which split between the jacksonians and the anti-jacksonians which eventually became the democratic party and the republican party respectively.
[QUOTE=gazzy_GUI;48550098]idk mang, if there was really a wage gap wouldn't it just make more sense to never hire men, cutting costs and increasing the bottom line and all that.[/QUOTE] That's not what the wage gap means - it means that women are in lower-paying jobs on average compared to men on average. It doesn't mean that women get lower pay than men in the same jobs - it means that as a whole, women in our society are earning less than men. Plenty of discussion about the wage gap all over the internet - it's not about "women are paid unequally for the exact same job," it's "women as a whole are paid less than men because they aren't able to consistently achieve the same high-paying jobs as men." There's loads of sexism and social pressure in male-heavy courses like engineering and shit that pushes women out of those jobs. Hell, my sister was gonna go into engineering but everyone said that she shouldn't do it because it's too difficult - so she didn't do it.
I read a paper last year that claim women were in more low paying jobs because they were more likely to choose part-time work over full-time and when comparing the wages of part-time men and women, the women actually had a higher average than the men. Sadly I can't find the paper because it was just inside a textbook I no longer have.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48550462] Plenty of discussion about the wage gap all over the internet - it's not about "women are paid unequally for the exact same job,"[/QUOTE] No, this is how I always see it portrayed. Whether it be in articles or by FP feminists (in this very thread even). They always claim that a woman makes 78 cents for every dollar a man makes. [QUOTE=splenda;48547384] [URL=http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/13/news/economy/equal-pay-day-2015/]CNN talks about it to if you trust them.[/url][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]78 cents on the dollar[/QUOTE] Perhaps its an aim to sensationalize or misrepresenting the data to further their cause but its always presented in a way that would lead anybody to think that a man and woman working the exact same job, same hours, etc are being payed differently due to gender discrimination.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48550583]No, this is how I always see it portrayed. Whether it be in articles or by FP feminists (in this very thread even). They always claim that a woman makes 78 cents for every dollar a man makes. Perhaps its an aim to sensationalize or misrepresenting the data to further their cause but its always presented in a way that would lead anybody to think that a man and woman working the exact same job, same hours, etc are being payed differently due to gender discrimination.[/QUOTE] Again, it's on a societal level, not on an individual one. A woman working for minimum wage is making the same as a man working the exact same job. The "78 cents on a dollar" quip confuses and misleads a lot of people. I'm not a fan of it because it sort of implies an individual level when it's not that. It means that when you compare the average incomes of [i]all[/i] men and women in the country, women as a whole earn 78% of what men do.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48550596]Again, it's on a societal level, not on an individual one. A woman working for minimum wage is making the same as a man working the exact same job. The "78 cents on a dollar" quip confuses and misleads a lot of people. I'm not a fan of it because it sort of implies an individual level when it's not that. It means that when you compare the average incomes of [i]all[/i] men and women in the country, women as a whole earn 78% of what men do.[/QUOTE] The "Woman make 60% for the SAME JOB" falsehood is spread around enough that it has managed to make it's way onto several high profile shows (Rick and Morty for example). Most academics know better, but not everyone does.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48550596] The "78 cents on a dollar" quip confuses and misleads a lot of people. I'm not a fan of it because it sort of implies an individual level when it's not that. It means that when you compare the average incomes of [i]all[/i] men and women in the country, women as a whole earn 78% of what men do.[/QUOTE] But its not malicious or even really bad. Women generally prefer benefits over cash, have maternity to deal with, usually aren't expected to be breadwinners, stop working to be mothers instead of build up seniority, choose part time, etc . [editline]26th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Helix Snake;48550665] Most academics know better, but not everyone does.[/QUOTE] Perhaps most do but I see quite a few that don't.
The debate was interesting but the Proposition side won out; there are too many potential abuses that can occur via the opposition sides's arguements. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, etc.
[QUOTE=splenda;48547493]From reading the source in your video, not actually watching the video because I have nothing to listen to it with atm but read his source, his claims are being made off of guesses and then talks about a single politifact article. I'm sorry but the link in the video is basically an opinion piece. Please provide real sources or read the other sources I listed, the one I skimmed through was the CNN one anyways. And please read the parts in the article where they are comparing weekly salaries of people with the exact same job and the same education levels. Saying that women take part time jobs, leave work because they have children, or value "family friendly" work spaces is totally missing the point of the sources I provided.[/QUOTE] Are you sure you got the right source list? Because I just checked, and he has a shit ton of sources backing him up, including the department of labor, the Stockholm school of economic, the washington post, and the new york times... All of these sources are fairly respected, so to say his claims are pure guess work and one politifact article isin't true. Here is the completely list of sources that article he uses: Washington Post - Fact checking the 2014 State of the Union Address Department of Labor study - An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women AAUW - When controlled for education and career choices, women make 93% "of what men earned," p34 New York Times - Home Depot settles discrimination suit for $87.5 million Stockholm School of Economics - Study finding that even in egalitarian societies, women are less likely to negotiate for salaries Journal of Personality and Social Psychology - "Who Goes to the Bargaining Table? The Influence of Gender and Framing on the Initiation of Negotiation" (Small, et al) Monster.com - Women's salaries are equal to, or outearn men in engineering fields Washington Post - Women less likely to negotiate for salaries at Carnegie Mellon JSTOR - Gender differences in job satisfaction Science Direct - Why are women so happy at work? Springer.com - Job satisfaction may vary by occupation New York Times - Money, Gender and Job Satisfaction Bloomberg - Number of US Ralph Lauren employees estimated at 14,000 Glass Door - Ralph Lauren cashier salary estimates Forbes - Ralph Lauren CEO salary *Note: The hourly rate was calculated by assuming there were roughly 20 cashiers at the flagship store making an average of $19,770 per year. Pew Research Center - What men value versus what women value in the workforce Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) - Gender-Job Satisfaction Differences across Europe: An Indicator for Labor Market Modernization Bank of Tokyo - Factor Decomposition of the Gender.Job Satisfaction Paradox: Evidence from Japan Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis - Debate about what percentage of wage disparity is due to sexual discrimination Centenary.edu - Gender paradox in work satisfaction apparent in the Protestant Clergy Washington Post - White House's use of data on the gender wage gap
[QUOTE=splenda;48546991]Except I was trying to explain the viewpoint of most feminists. You may care about gamergate or whatever and that's fine, more power to you. What I'm saying is that in the broad inequalities in the world, ethics in the journalistic coverage of a hobby is next to meaningless to this activist group. If it is ever brought up in discussion, people either go "wtf is that" or they laugh about it. I'm not trying to belittle your precious movement and I apologize for my wording in the last sentence of the first paragraph in my post.[/QUOTE] This is whats wrong with their mindset. They are so incredibly selfish that they are willing to stomp allover us, simply because "gaming" has long been a media punching bag. They cant fathom that we can have both equality of genders, ethics in journalism, and fair reporting of both. Instead we have a gaggle of idiots, including you in this case, who see no better response but to completely disregard gamergate's interests to the point that they are activley willing to lie and slander us just to help their bullshit narrative of "oppressed women by evil gamers" for their cause. The same thing has been happening with the black lives matter movement to some extent, people focus on individual acts of violence against members of their race by police whether or not the individual situation is justified, because the narrative is deemed more important than truth. Even if there are better examples of real police violence and brutality, a few of the ones we've seen have been dubious. The exact same thing happened with zoe quinn, wu, anita, there was never any substance to their cases of targetted harrassment(its a bit different than the police thing because in one case it was shitty examples and the other real examples of internet harrassment problems rather than specific gamer problems, coupled with a specific defense campaign by the corrupt journalists in question) but it was picked up for the narrative. It's the same mindset as "well, rape is bad and i want to reduce rape through social pressures, but there is a news story about a false rape allegation and instead of condemning this as also bad i will go COMPLETELY OFF THE RAILS and claim that people wanting false rape allegations punished and equal perception of males who are raped is sexist and worse than rape and all that other shit." It's taking the stance that you need to step on other people's rights just to help whatever cause you think is positive. quite frankly it's so unbelievably stupid and completely missing the point of even doing any good by pushing for anyone's rights at all that i am seething thinking about this. It's a lesser version of the typical seesaw of trying to oppress everyone else more to save yourself or your friends.
[QUOTE=boobs;48548351]You know, you're doing the same thing the woman in the video was doing. Even though the topic he's discussing isn't [i]exactly[/i] the one from the video, his post still has a connection somewhat; and is how he feels. You can't just write him off as a "shitposter" because of how he expresses his opinion. I've seen this a lot on facepunch, someone with an opinion says something and before you know it one of the older members just come in and try to entirely defame them by saying shit like you just said.[/QUOTE] Did you read his posts? They're shit posts. They're over aggressive and factually incorrect bollocks about what Gamergate is. Plus he's criticising people for caring about gaming on a gaming forum. In the corruption in gaming journalism thread we get this all the time, somebody that's AGG pops in and declares GG as a sexist hate group against women or just says 'who even cares you morons fucking quit whining' and those posts are shit posts, they have a negative value, they shit up the thread with misinformed or downright dumb opinions that cause unnecessary arguments.
[QUOTE=Robman8908;48541023]Love how she won't let that guy talk, then she sees an Asian woman wanting to say something, who goes on to just wreck her. [I]Stop[/I]! Let me be offended for you! Shut up and sit down![/QUOTE] She has the floor, it's her time to talk. She can shut them up if she wants to. Her opponent does the exact same thing.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;48552696]She has the floor, it's her time to talk. She can shut them up if she wants to. Her opponent does the exact same thing.[/QUOTE] I just think it's funny how she shut him down but let the Asian lady destroy her Sexism in action
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48553075]I just think it's funny how she shut him down but let the Asian lady destroy her Sexism in action[/QUOTE] It backfired on her so hard. Was fun to watch.
[QUOTE=Ithon;48548143] just pop this down right here.[/QUOTE] this guy was on an Australian programme called Q&A and presented some really good arguments about not dismissing people who don't like same sex marriage. As a hard supporter of SSM I've always hated how the support side go on an absolute witch hunt to destroy those who don't like it, forgetting everybody has the right to an opinion as long as they'll argue about it maturely. I really liked this
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;48558043]this guy was on an Australian programme called Q&A and presented some really good arguments about not dismissing people who don't like same sex marriage. As a hard supporter of SSM I've always hated how the support side go on an absolute witch hunt to destroy those who don't like it, forgetting everybody has the right to an opinion as long as they'll argue about it maturely. I really liked this[/QUOTE] My Grandpa is against same sex intercourse for religious reasons but supports same sex marriage because he doesn't delude himself into thinking homosexuality is a choice. I don't know why more conservatives can't be like him.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48550670]But its not malicious or even really bad. Women generally prefer benefits over cash, have maternity to deal with, usually aren't expected to be breadwinners, stop working to be mothers instead of build up seniority, choose part time, etc . [editline]26th August 2015[/editline] Perhaps most do but I see quite a few that don't.[/QUOTE] Most sexism isn't malicious - same with racism. It's moved from essentially owning women as property to recognizing how our social structure disadvantages women. The idea that women "aren't expected to be breadwinners" [i]is[/i] sexism in action. Why aren't they? Because our society says they're not supposed to be. That's why they're making less money. Because our society dictates that it's not what they're [i]meant[/i] to do that, as women. Can they? Yeah, absolutely, it's [i]possible[/i]. But it's not regular. It's not equal. It's something that can only be explained by social structure. Maternity leave is something that could explain a wage gap to some degree - but that's why you see feminists pushing for paternity leave as well as maternity leave in a lot of places. Because it levels the playing field, it gets rid of societal expectations of men to be the breadwinners who have small roles in raising their children, and it allows women and men to easily swap "breadwinner" roles or share them equally. Gotta look beyond what women "choose" and look into how society pushes people into certain roles and discourages them from other roles. It's not impossible for individual women to be vastly more successful than the average man, but [i]on average[/i] it's more socially difficult for women to gain the opportunity to succeed than it is for a man.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;48558729]Most sexism isn't malicious - same with racism. It's moved from essentially owning women as property to recognizing how our social structure disadvantages women. The idea that women "aren't expected to be breadwinners" [i]is[/i] sexism in action. Why aren't they? Because our society says they're not supposed to be. That's why they're making less money. Because our society dictates that it's not what they're [i]meant[/i] to do that, as women. Can they? Yeah, absolutely, it's [i]possible[/i]. But it's not regular. It's not equal. It's something that can only be explained by social structure. Maternity leave is something that could explain a wage gap to some degree - but that's why you see feminists pushing for paternity leave as well as maternity leave in a lot of places. Because it levels the playing field, it gets rid of societal expectations of men to be the breadwinners who have small roles in raising their children, and it allows women and men to easily swap "breadwinner" roles or share them equally. Gotta look beyond what women "choose" and look into how society pushes people into certain roles and discourages them from other roles. It's not impossible for individual women to be vastly more successful than the average man, but [i]on average[/i] it's more socially difficult for women to gain the opportunity to succeed than it is for a man.[/QUOTE] It would still be great if activists focused more on a positive approach. From what I've seen to far, the focus on inequalities and "injustices" (I'm putting this is quotes here because a good deal of what I see prominently featured in that regard internationally is questionable and doesn't represent the more pressing but harder to digest issues.) is making the situation worse because it [I]increases[/I] the basic issue of the perception that women don't a perspective in those areas. Which, for the record, is a real shame. At least over here in Germany activism is usually a lot less clumsy, so instead of metaphorically shouting over each other people will normally try to promote understanding and opportunities while staying true to their principles even if it's not terribly convenient for them at that moment. (Notwithstanding the extremists currently "protecting Germany" while blatantly trampling on the constitution.)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.