Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should women be in the workforce?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

    Well I feel that the workplace is the equal for men and women. For example have you ever heard of any report suggesting that CEOs who are men are making more money compared to CEO to my woman. The reports that I have read are saying that women are still making less money compared to men at the high levels of the workplace. I feel advancements have been made at the middle level because of unions but the higher levels have a discrepancy...And in that discrepancy there could be good female leaders whom Are wrongly being underpaid and there could be some CEOs that are females that are justifiably being paid a little bit less than male CEOs who might do a better job.
    This is largely a myth. There are numerous reasons for this, and this article lays out the major ones pretty clearly.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gen...complete-myth/

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    I have no problem with women in the workforce so long as they aren't given any sort of special privilege by law (like affirmative action). I also think we should have an economy where it isn't a necessity that both persons in a relationship have to work in order to make a decent living.
    Well I feel that the workplace is the equal for men and women. For example have you ever heard of any report suggesting that CEOs who are men are making more money compared to CEO to my woman. The reports that I have read are saying that women are still making less money compared to men at the high levels of the workplace. I feel advancements have been made at the middle level because of unions but the higher levels have a discrepancy...And in that discrepancy there could be good female leaders whom Are wrongly being underpaid and there could be some CEOs that are females that are justifiably being paid a little bit less than male CEOs who might do a better job.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

    Because some conservative men in our world believe that women should be at home in the kitchen and not at the workplace. That’s why the questions being asked because those type of people exist in our world.
    I have no problem with women in the workforce so long as they aren't given any sort of special privilege by law (like affirmative action). I also think we should have an economy where it isn't a necessity that both persons in a relationship have to work in order to make a decent living.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    How about instead of asking "Why?" we ask the OP "why not"?
    Because some conservative men in our world believe that women should be at home in the kitchen and not at the workplace. That’s why the questions being asked because those type of people exist in our world.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    Totally different situation, as you should know. Putting your life on the line for your country is not the same as giving a female a job.
    Putting your life on the line cannot be used in modern societies to justify the economic dependence of women, unless you serve in Taliban's army. Your argument echoes medieval mentality with lords who defend their people and grateful peasants who in turn were economically depended on their lords.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Phaing View Post
    If you guy scan come up with a way that women can stay alive without doing any work, I'm all ears.
    Define "work".

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Jutland View Post

    Same guy also expects preferential treatment because he served in the armed forces
    Totally different situation, as you should know. Putting your life on the line for your country is not the same as giving a female a job.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phaing
    replied
    If you guy scan come up with a way that women can stay alive without doing any work, I'm all ears.

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by Jutland View Post

    Same guy also expects preferential treatment because he served in the armed forces
    The sense of entitlement that so many people have nowadays is becoming a huge issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jutland
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    I'm not the one claiming I lost a job because I'm a man. I haven't claimed anything that would need to be verified.
    Same guy also expects preferential treatment because he served in the armed forces

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    Nor can we verify anything you say, either. This is a discussion, not a college exam.
    I'm not the one claiming I lost a job because I'm a man. I haven't claimed anything that would need to be verified.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    Nope. Because there's no way to verify anything you're saying is true and isn't more of your bias. Based on what I know, I'd gamble that she works better with minorities and women than you do. Do you know her educational background and GPA? Probably not and those are additional factors. But, because you feel entitled, you'll ignore those things.
    Nor can we verify anything you say, either. This is a discussion, not a college exam.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Herman Hum View Post
    Who else is going to answer my phones and serve me coffee?
    How about that dumb drone in the mail room?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    The question should be why shouldn't women be expected to contribute to the economy.

    There is a sickness in society I call the princess syndrome.

    There is a bit of folk wisdom in which you will hear men inculturated into a K strategy life style that goes something like this, women have half the money and all the vagina. This is a reflection of the traditional sex roles in which men provide security and women babies. These attitudes are rooted in biological reality.

    The life history trajectory of the sexual market place value of men and women are polar, decreasing in women and increasing in men with age. To some extent this is compensated for by a legal system where women past their optimal reproductive age are guaranteed half the money disincentivising males from abandoning them for younger women. As an aside these systems break down when monogamy is not reinforced by social censure.

    There is no denying the perennial popularity of being a princess in female children. Despite decades of promotion for an asexual culture biology still dominates. The question is what is a princess? If you strip away the cultural accoutrements a princess is a baby making machine in waiting. Someone who's every need is provided by drones in the form of servants. Their fertility is the critical factor in the political hierarchy. Despite the decay of the monarchy in a world where ever home is a castle the biological underpinnings of the values reflected in the monarchs remain. Those values include attitudes towards fertile young women.

    Freedom is about responsibility. In a world where eggs are highly valued because of their temporal limits. Where female hierarchy is largely based on physical signs of fertility. Where mean girls still rule adolescent social structures. Where the most progressive countries have the highest level of sexual segregation in the workforce. Where the pay inequity between males and females has largely been discredited. Two questions come to mind. First why is the conversation still about female opportunity not female responsibility? Second when will sanity return to questions regarding the sexes that include biological reality.











    Reality has no place in political correctness or current politics. As for the return of sanity? Don't we wish...

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

    Nope. Because there's no way to verify anything you're saying is true and isn't more of your bias. Based on what I know, I'd gamble that she works better with minorities and women than you do. Do you know her educational background and GPA? Probably not and those are additional factors. But, because you feel entitled, you'll ignore those things.
    Education? Yes. GPA? No.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X