• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I was at the beach today

nucky9 said:
Anything in particular you are basing that on, or is it just a feeling?
Click to expand...

You can't prove a negative. It is incumbent for you to prove that there is sexism in the workplace.
 
Monica33 said:
Spot on . No confirmation bias involved

Guru and wise man Jordan Petersen dealt with this subject beautifully and blew holes miles wide through the usual bleating arguments telling us how badly we are treated .
Click to expand...

If being mansplained to is your kink, whatever. For most women that's a hard limit.
 
noonereal said:
I was at the town beach today. It's a small beach maybe 50 people there today. Moms with their kids and seniors were 95% of the folks.

2 observations

1) lack of working age men on the beach. Seems to typify that more men have careers than do women hence it's no surprise they tend to dominate the top positions in business.

2) The most attractive women at the beach had the nicest car at the beach. Need I say more? I doubt she works at all.

What is the point?

Well, I was in a thread the other day where folks were screaming about how women are discriminated against in business.

I think my simple observations goes a long way in explaining much of why this may be. It's not discrimination at all. There are far fewer career women who do not take time away from careers.
Click to expand...

Why the **** is this in the Sex and Sexuality section?
 
Last edited:
gino said:
You can't prove a negative. It is incumbent for you to prove that there is sexism in the workplace.
Click to expand...
I disagree, since she said 'any longer' implying she has noted a change. I think it is fair game to ask what has changed from her PoV, to allow her to claim sexism is no longer a thing.
 
notquiteright said:
Factor in most women also take care of the household and family they manage amazing things in those 3.6 hours... ✌️
Click to expand...

Sure. I agree. They tend to work more taking care of their own home and family. I guess, they'll just have to find a way to monetize that.

Until that happens, women will make less than men, due to working at the job less hours.
 
noonereal said:
I was at the town beach today. It's a small beach maybe 50 people there today. Moms with their kids and seniors were 95% of the folks.

2 observations

1) lack of working age men on the beach. Seems to typify that more men have careers than do women hence it's no surprise they tend to dominate the top positions in business.

2) The most attractive women at the beach had the nicest car at the beach. Need I say more? I doubt she works at all.

What is the point?

Well, I was in a thread the other day where folks were screaming about how women are discriminated against in business.

I think my simple observations goes a long way in explaining much of why this may be. It's not discrimination at all. There are far fewer career women who do not take time away from careers.
Click to expand...
There are many reasons as to why the pay gap is a myth, or at least why some of the gap *is valid.
 
nucky9 said:
So much wrong here, but I'll pretend there isn't and discuss it on its own merits.

The fact that woman who stay home to care for their kids (which is a societal good) would be disadvantaged relative to fathers who don't is an issue in and of itself. Not easy to solve, in my opinion, but it is a form of 'soft' sexism.

And that's ignoring the differences in pressure which cause mothers to feel they are 'bad' if they don't stay home with their children, while most fathers don't feel that same pressure. I think some of that pressure is internal (and maybe relates to maternal instinct), but not all of it is.
Click to expand...
You didn't actually prove that anything that he said was wrong.
 
Dragonfly said:
I think it’s such bullshit that if a woman wants a career she’s a selfish bitch who either neglects her kids, or a horrific inhumane selfish bitch for not having any kids at all.

But then, heaven forbid she takes a day or two off in summertime to spend some quality time with her kids at the beach, then she’s a lazy good for nothing money grubbing leach.

You people are pathetic.
Click to expand...
Nobody thinks that... not really.
 
buck said:
Women tend to work less hours than men at all levels.

For example, men in management work an average of 41.6 hours. Women at the same level work an average of 38.0 hours.

www.bls.gov

Persons at work by occupation, sex, and usual full- or part-time status

Current Population Survey (CPS) data, 2021 annual averages
www.bls.gov www.bls.gov
Click to expand...
I find this interesting and am curious as to the 'why'. In the UK, for instance, the gap seems to be narrower.

However, according to that census data, women work on average 94.6% of the time that men do, while earning only 84% as much, so while part of the issue, hourly wages are also lower.

Even if the gap in hours worked did explain the gap in pay, it is still necessary to identify the reason(s) for the gap in hours worked, before any conclusion can be made.
 
Bodhisattva said:
You didn't actually prove that anything that he said was wrong.
Click to expand...
Right, that's why I said I wasn't going to try and would instead take his anecdotal evidence at face value.
 
nucky9 said:
Right, that's why I said I wasn't going to try and would instead take his anecdotal evidence at face value.
Click to expand...
Okay... that just seemed a little confusing. But then again it was 4am here when I wrote that.
 
nucky9 said:
I find this interesting and am curious as to the 'why'. In the UK, for instance, the gap seems to be narrower.

However, according to that census data, women work on average 94.6% of the time that men do, while earning only 84% as much, so while part of the issue, hourly wages are also lower.

Even if the gap in hours worked did explain the gap in pay, it is still necessary to identify the reason(s) for the gap in hours worked, before any conclusion can be made.
Click to expand...

Few things I noticed:

they are combinig paid (job) and unpaid (home) work in some of the stats.

It looks like the difference in weekly hours worked (job) is significant - 22 hours women vs 34 hours men. Seems higher difference than the us, no?

They aren't separating by job levels, as they did in the BLS data. Are women working a lot of hours at lower paid jobs, which could explain some of thenpay discrepancy.

Anyway, just surface review, I may be wrong, so feel free to fact check me.
 
buck said:
Few things I noticed:

they are combinig paid (job) and unpaid (home) work in some of the stats.

It looks like the difference in weekly hours worked (job) is significant - 22 hours women vs 34 hours men. Seems higher difference than the us, no?

They aren't separating by job levels, as they did in the BLS data. Are women working a lot of hours at lower paid jobs, which could explain some of thenpay discrepancy.

Anyway, just surface review, I may be wrong, so feel free to fact check me.
Click to expand...
Sorry, can you be more specific about which data you are talking about? I can't find these numbers in the census data, which is where I assume they are coming from.

Edit: Ah sorry, I misread what you said, and you are referring to the UK data. Yes, you are correct - I think they issue is that the data isn't correcting for employment status. That means it doesn't really support anything, either way - my bad, it wasn't a good source to use.
 
Last edited:
nucky9 said:
Sorry, can you be more specific about which data you are talking about? I can't find these numbers in the census data, which is where I assume they are coming from.
Click to expand...

From the bbc link you provided:

Since the 1970s, women have increased their paid working hours by more than five hours to 22 per week

Meanwhile, men have cut their paid hours by more than eight to 34 per week.

I did not check out your other link.
 
buck said:
Sure. I agree. They tend to work more taking care of their own home and family. I guess, they'll just have to find a way to monetize that.

Until that happens, women will make less than men, due to working at the job less hours.
Click to expand...
That is an issue though. If there is a societal burden being placed on one group disproportionate to the societal rewards that group receives, and it is gender-based - it *is* a form of sexism. However, fixing it isn't trivial, since it can't be directly monetized, as you say. However, that doesn't mean that there is nothing that can be done - tax breaks for stay at home parents might be part of the solution, for instance. The bigger issue to me is that committing to child care means, in theory, being less competitive in the labour market, which could lead to lower pay directly, but could also be used to justify 'hard' sexism. It would be interesting to compare the outcomes for stay-at-home mothers with stay-at-home fathers.
 
buck said:
From the bbc link you provided:

Since the 1970s, women have increased their paid working hours by more than five hours to 22 per week

Meanwhile, men have cut their paid hours by more than eight to 34 per week.

I did not check out your other link.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sorry - I edited, since I realized my error. The way the data is presented in the BBC link is basically useless to this discussion, either way.
 
nucky9 said:
That is an issue though. If there is a societal burden being placed on one group disproportionate to the societal rewards that group receives, and it is gender-based - it *is* a form of sexism. However, fixing it isn't trivial, since it can't be directly monetized, as you say. However, that doesn't mean that there is nothing that can be done - tax breaks for stay at home parents might be part of the solution, for instance. The bigger issue to me is that committing to child care means, in theory, being less competitive in the labour market, which could lead to lower pay directly, but could also be used to justify 'hard' sexism. It would be interesting to compare the outcomes for stay-at-home mothers with stay-at-home fathers.
Click to expand...

Is it a societal difference or a hardwired (centuries of evolution) difference? Women and men tend to choose different careers. Women tend to prioritize family over work. Me, personally, I agree with the women and think family should be prioritized. I am doing that now and enjoying every minute of it.

Anyway, I would disagree and not support the rest of your statement or recommendations. I don't care enough to argue it, though.
 
Women comprise nearly half of the U.S. labor force at 46.8 percent, so I really don't know what you are talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom