Had you posted the Department of Labour report, I doubt there would be a single reply, for or against this issue. And if there were, it would be 'DIDN'T READ LOL'
My point is that certain posters were going to give similar responses no matter what because of the subject matter. They went into automatic defensive mode.
This is a copout of your crappy thread. Just look at the Mississippi 'religious freedom' thread and the liberal responses there. People give you crappy responses because you make crappy threads with crappy arguments. Try harder and you might get an actual debate.
Greg Abbott’s education plan cites controversial thinker on race, gender In talking about his Pre-kindergarten education plans this week, Greg Abbott cited Charles Murray, a conservative libertarian scholar “No woman has been a significant original thinker in any of the world’s great philosophical traditions,” he wrote. “Women have produced a smaller number of important visual artists, and none that is clearly in the first rank. No female composer is even close to the first rank. Social restrictions undoubtedly damped down women’s contributions in all of the arts, but the pattern of accomplishment that did break through is strikingly consistent with what we know about the respective strengths of male and female cognitive repertoires.” Murray currently works for the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute and has written numerous books, essays and opinion columns on education.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/KkYKmrB9248" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Thank you for taking the time to summarize. bmd, if you can't be bothered to write more than a few words in your own op, at least take the time to respond to this paragraph. JuanValdez has given you a far more thoughtful response than your lazy op deserves.
The Bush administration has the CONSAD research corporation do some research which finds that there is no wage gap? Shocking news. Here's a response to the use of the statistics in that paper: http://amptoons.com/blog/2010/11/26...age-gap-masks-sexism-instead-of-measuring-it/
Okay, I went out of my way to find an official study supporting what I said. And you are going to respond to it by linking me to a ****ty blog?
Perhaps you should look into the studies cited by the "****ty blog." Wood, Corcoran & Courant (1993), Journal of Labor Economics; Dey & Hill (April 2007), American Association of University Women Educational Foundation; “Women’s Earnings” (Oct 2003), United States General Accounting Office; Blau & Kahn (June 2006), Industrial and Labor Relations Review; Mandel & Semyonov (Dec 2005), American Sociological Review; Boraas & Rodgers (March 2003), Monthly Labor Review; Johnson & Solon (Dec 1986), American Economic Review; Mulligan & Rubinstein (August 2008), Quarterly Journal of Economics; Fields & Wolft (Oct 1995), Industrial and Labor Review.
Good lord. This is the 21st century, isn't it? You would never know that by perusing Abbott's campaign literature, or the beliefs of the contributors and supporters he clinches to his bosom in gratitude.
Very valid point. I'd love this debate so much more if bmd would look deeply enough to address things like this.
Perhaps I can point out a better link? http://social.dol.gov/blog/myth-busting-the-pay-gap/ Before you all jump on bmd, he has a good point: the wage gap is closing quite rapidly. But unfortunately, that was not his main point. 1. Men do not make more than women for the same exact position/hours/duties, etc. They make the same. Your own paper invalidates this. There is anywhere from a 20% to 25% wage difference. Of that 20% to 25%, 40% is attributable to direct discrimination. 2. There are less women who pursue careers that lead to positions of power, and less women that desire stressful positions of power that require long hours. You are talking about causation here, when at best it's correlation. Are there fewer women who pursue careers that lead to positions of power or are they less likely to be given positions of power because they are women? 3. CEO's are generally much older. They could be 60 years old. Not a lot of women got advanced business degrees in the 1970's that would make them qualified candidates for CEO positions today. This is correct.Certain positions will require significant technical/network/etc. experience rare among the current generation of women given past discrimination. But given your point, we should see vast increases in the near future of women in positions of power... 4. Senators are voted on. Considering there are more women than men in this country, nobody is stopping women from getting elected. 1) Our political system heavily favors the incumbent (men), which average over 90% every election 2) It's very difficult to run at all without backing of either the democratic or republican establishment. Which gender do you think runs those establishments? 3) Powerful, aggressive women are seen as a negative while similar men are not. See portrayal of Hillary during her primary campaign. In general, use of one cherry-picked data point is not a good idea when you are trying to prove a controversial point. Give you an example: Obama's president, therefore racism no longer exists.
Bernie Sanders @SenSanders 6m Typical female workers earned $1,775 less last year than they did in 2007. ............................. Bernie Sanders @SenSanders 13m Typical male workers made $283 less last year than they did 44 years ago. War on workers is more like it.
republicans keeping it classy Breitbart Ad Depicting Nancy Pelosi As Miley Cyrus Is 'Disgusting' “To say the least, the Breitbart News ad is foul, offensive, and disrespectful to all women," Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) said in a statement. "It is a disgusting new low and would be reprehensible against any woman – regardless of party. It’s no wonder the Republicans are having problems appealing to women." http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/04/07/Welcome-to-Breitbart-California
Leaving aside the misleading thread title and that the OP is pretty much admitting he is trolling there is an issue here. A lot of evidence is showing that women are outpacing men when it comes to higher education but at the same time that women are still trailing men when it comes to earnings. This is a good piece on it. http://diverseeducation.com/article/48716/ I think both of these situations are things that need to be looked at. While it is good that women are doing well in education I don't think it is a good sign for the state of our society if a significant education gap happens. At the same time the persistence of the earnings gap is still an issue.
Who cares about education? Real world is not as confortable as a college classroom. That's where a mans testosterone and general focus give him an advantage over catty interpersonal wars and female related issues. oF course there are exceptions but were talking about median here
This pretty much sums it up, regardless of how unPC it is. We still live in a time, generally speaking, where a man is still expected to be the main support in a relationship. While women are indeed becoming more independent, there is a strong root of women who place a high value on a man who has a good job. This doesn't discount that women are generally more difficult to work with.
