Tiaexz does a girly job and why Kadagar prefers to be grappled by burly fireMEN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

You have a dictatorship where noone can vote and women earn 20% less for the same work, they can work in every area.
How high is the percentage of the strengths it draws from its population?

---

Somewhere above 50%, but still far from 100.

Deliberate underpayment of a segment of society will also lead to spoiling resources(with the assumption that basic capitalism is true), but not to the same extent as chaining half the population to the kitchen sink.

I don't know how it is in other countries...

But here in Sweden women only get about 90% of the mens salary.

We should however bear in mind they also have their own salary!!!






Sweden is rather equal, and I must honestly say that women just are not good enough.

Don't get me wrong, many women are super qualified, and many do a great job in the area they are in. HOWEVER, and this is important, it might just be so - that the female working force at large is NOT on par with the male one.

It might be that they only deserve 80-90% of the pay, given their work performance.

This isn't saying there are not remarkable women who do great, there are!! I talk about womankind at large.

We already know women are physically less able in most jobs. And let's face it, a lot of jobs are physical.

Women have however always claimed that they have mental capacities to make up for it. I then in return, WHERE THE HECK ARE THEY?

All chess masters, Gô masters, theoretical physicists... Yadda yadda yadda... Are all men.

If you look at the world renown chefs, women make up a negligible number. Heck, women can't even COOK better than men. A role they are traditionally seen as having had and should be proficient at.

I agree that women are better at being women than men... But on a open work market, where we value people after how they perform not who they are... Is there really a reason why women should take 50% of the lump sum, just because they are women? Even if they perform slightly worse than men at large?

When women start doing as good a job as men, I am ALL for them having equal monetary rights. Till then they should just STFU and try to improve themselves.

Would you rate white women below or above black males then and where can we place asian women? Should they earn the same as white males?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Would you rate white women below or above black males then and where can we place asian women? Should they earn the same as white males?

---

No need for me to rate a thing.

Reality does it for me as well as you, see, that is the beauty of it :2thumbsup:

... Kadager you are really plumbing whole new lows ...

There are currently 83 Female Chess Masters btw...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Moody

... Kadager you are really plumbing whole new lows ...

There are currently 83 Female Chess Masters btw...

---

Source?

Sure, I'll grant you that regardless, as compared to how many men?

Also, how well do they do against the men?

I can call my dog a chess grand master, doesn't mean I don't beat him almost all of the time though (sometimes it's a tie because he flips the board).




Oooooh, and I meant Grand master...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_grandmasters

I'm not saying no woman can play chess. I am saying that men are DAMN better at it, and if we would spread the prize pot in chess 50/50 between women and men, women would do a comparatively less good job for the same money.

Is that fair?

Is it "equality" if women get payed based on gender, not results?

Kad, have you considered the possibility that the average woman is more intelligent than you but you're not intelligent enough to realize it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Kad, have you considered the possibility that the average woman is more intelligent than you but you're not intelligent enough to realize it?

---

I have. But then the average woman opened her mouth and talked about politics.

Did you know that the Feminist party in Sweden is for a "no arms defense", this with Russia as neighbour?

Don't read me wrong though, I am sure a HBTQ-Pride parade in force would scare Putin away :clown:

Yeah, I'm sure the Glorious Swedish army will scare Putin away (tihi).

Also, being good at chess is equaled with intelligence. Epic fail. Being intelligent isn't necessary for chess, a good geometric memory is. Magnus Carlsen doesn't have above-average intelligence, he has an above average geometric memory.

Meanwhile, medicine is currently the educational program requiring the highest grade. 3 out of 5 medicine students in Norway are women. Not surprising, considering that women graduate with a higher grade than men have.

Why are men so stupid?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Meanwhile, medicine is currently the educational program requiring the highest grade. 3 out of 5 medicine students in Norway are women. Not surprising, considering that women graduate with a higher grade than men have.

Why are men so stupid?

---

Same in the UK - and no one is decying this gender inequality and helping more men into the profession. Nor are white men being helped - which are a minority in some specialities such as GP.

When women are doing better it is ignored or held up as a good example. When men do it is gnashing of teeth and a heated discussion of how the playing field can be "levelled" - or more specifically altered to suit women's strengths.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Same in the UK - and no one is decying this gender inequality and helping more men into the profession. Nor are white men being helped - which are a minority in some specialities such as GP.

When women are doing better it is ignored or held up as a good example. When men do it is gnashing of teeth and a heated discussion of how the playing field can be "levelled" - or more specifically altered to suit women's strengths.

~:smoking:

---

The question of male school performance is a subject throughout the teaching education. Causes of and solutions to male under-performance is a hot topic in every lecture dealing with achievement.

Your assertion is false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Oooooh, and I meant Grand master...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_grandmasters

I'm not saying no woman can play chess. I am saying that men are DAMN better at it, and if we would spread the prize pot in chess 50/50 between women and men, women would do a comparatively less good job for the same money.

---

I only skimmed the list, but your claim that it's all men doesn't quite hold even then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentina_Gunina
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatiana_Kosintseva
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Polgar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhu_Chen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pia_Cramling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktorija_Čmilytė
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elina_Danielian

And you probably never considered that women may just be less interested in a game such as chess, just like the average woman cares less about tanks and the average man cares less about knitting.
So let's have a look at this list: http://www.tkga.com/?page=MastersGraduates

See, it's mostly women, that must mean that men can't use their hands properly when they're not masturbating in a corner!
Obviously we can derive from this that men are physically inferior because they can't knit!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

The question of male school performance is a subject throughout the teaching education. Causes of and solutions to male under-performance is a hot topic in every lecture dealing with achievement.

Your assertion is false.

---

Oh good, some teachers are wringing their hands about it. All sorted...

Funny that there are laws to have a percentage of CEOs who are women... and some teachers are having a think.

Sorry, having a hot topic is not the same as equal action.

~:smoking:

That's all a rather unfair characterization. Most feminists would argue that "toxic masculinity" and other such cultural trends are what underlie male underperformance in education., meaning that broad social change in line with feminist tenets will resolve it as well as any other of the current hot issues.

Also:

Quote:

---

Women and minorities are systematically underprivileged and underrepresented? Meh. Men are beginning to lose some of their relative privilege to women and minorities here and there? What about equality!?!

---

I call that a suspect take on the state of affairs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Oh good, some teachers are wringing their hands about it. All sorted...

Funny that there are laws to have a percentage of CEOs who are women... and some teachers are having a think.

Sorry, having a hot topic is not the same as equal action.

~:smoking:

---

There are laws to have a percentage of CEO's as men as well.

...And the "having a think" has resulted in several policies aimed at diminishing the gap. It was also a major focus in the last curriculum overhaul in Norway. I am unsure of what more you want.

Are you of the opinion that the education sector is a bad place to solve problems with education?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

There are laws to have a percentage of CEO's as men as well.

...And the "having a think" has resulted in several policies aimed at diminishing the gap. It was also a major focus in the last curriculum overhaul in Norway. I am unsure of what more you want.

Are you of the opinion that the education sector is a bad place to solve problems with education?

---

It isn't education. It is decrying that when there are more men in a field this needs to be "fixed" and when there are more women this should be applauded.

One could start up with decrying the unequal number of primary school teachers as well as decrying the number of men in IT.
One could discuss equal opportunities rather than outcomes for persons leaving school.

Perhaps we should force girls to use guns, play with toy soldiers and play video games and force boys to pay with Barbie dolls etc. Or we cuold accept that that boys and girls are inherently different and will want to do different things. Making schooling to play to their strengths is good. Using schools to shoe horn both to be the same is bad.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

It isn't education. It is decrying that when there are more men in a field this needs to be "fixed" and when there are more women this should be applauded.

One could start up with decrying the unequal number of primary school teachers as well as decrying the number of men in IT.

---

Feminists will tell you that they want more women in IT and more men in childcare and education. Feminist goals are additive and synergistic, not subtractive.

Quote:

---

One could discuss equal opportunities rather than outcomes for persons leaving school.

---

That's exactly what they want.

Quote:

---

Or we cuold accept that that boys and girls are inherently different and will want to do different things.

---

If you believe in evidence-based practice, rory, then you will agree that the precise functional nature of these differences (and their sociobehavioral outcomes) are an open empirical question and not simply something that can be inferred from the gender situation at any given point in history. That is, their existence has been demonstrated but what they are and what they mean is not known to any extent, so don't make frivolous assumptions about "what girls/boys inherently like".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

It isn't education. It is decrying that when there are more men in a field this needs to be "fixed" and when there are more women this should be applauded.

One could start up with decrying the unequal number of primary school teachers as well as decrying the number of men in IT.
One could discuss equal opportunities rather than outcomes for persons leaving school.

Perhaps we should force girls to use guns, play with toy soldiers and play video games and force boys to pay with Barbie dolls etc. Or we cuold accept that that boys and girls are inherently different and will want to do different things. Making schooling to play to their strengths is good. Using schools to shoe horn both to be the same is bad.

~:smoking:

---

Or we could call them stupid because they usually do not enjoy the activities we enjoy?

As for the decrying, it also depends on the country, HoreTore mostly talks about Norway while you probably have a mostly British take.
It should not be surprising to anyone that things are much worse in Britain than they are in Norway. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

One could start up with decrying the unequal number of primary school teachers as well as decrying the number of men in IT.

---

We already are. There are several recruitment schemes to try to get more male teachers in the lower years, and a male applicant is more likely to get a primary teaching job than a woman, because the principals want more males teachers.

Do try to keep up with the world before decrying it, rory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

We already are. There are several recruitment schemes to try to get more male teachers in the lower years, and a male applicant is more likely to get a primary teaching job than a woman, because the principals want more males teachers.

Do try to keep up with the world before decrying it, rory.

---

I am aware that this is the case. I am able to perceive that these things are different - a scheme is not the same as enforced quotas.

Do you see the difference?

One penalises if you don't have the right numbers, the other is a wishy washy hope with no negative press regarding how women have over 70% of the jobs which is the case in professions with more men.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I am aware that this is the case. I am able to perceive that these things are different - a scheme is not the same as enforced quotas.

Do you see the difference?

One penalises if you don't have the right numbers, the other is a wishy washy hope with no negative press regarding how women have over 70% of the jobs which is the case in professions with more men.

~:smoking:

---

Yes. And in other news, apples are round and hard while bananas are long, curved and soft.

CEO's are male because female candidates are not considered. Primary teachers are female because male candidates do not exist. Not one company failed to fill the gender quota in their boardrooms with qualified females after the law was passed. There was the usual doom&gloom hysteria before the law was passed on the unavailability of female candidates, but every did just fine.

If you introduce a law requiring 40% of either gender among the teaching staff, male teachers won't suddenly pop out of a hat. A teacher isn't something you can just be, you have to have the relevant education. And the people with that education as well as a penis simply do not exist, and a law won't suddenly create them.

Recruitment campaigns aimed at males are about as much you can do. You can't lower the entry requirements to get more males either, as the educational programs aren't full and anyone can get in anyway.

The only law you can pass to get more male primary teachers(which everyone wants by the way), you have to pass a law dictating which educational programs men can apply to. I'm not sure we should have laws like that.

Edit: I missed the point apparently.

Way to miss the point squared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Men just don't like to teach. You heard from HoreTore first everyone. If women are not in a sector its because of sexism, if men are not its because men obviously are not applying.


Never mind the fact that men are treated as possible pedophiles from day 1 if they wish to work with little kids.

---

Men do not teach primary school because it's seen as womens work, just like women are not CEO's because that's seen as a mans job.

Still, similar causes can demand different solutions. I don't see where I've said that men don't like to teach. Which would be a little weird, considering how I'm a man who likes to teach...

I found this old post of mine in another place:

Quote:

---

Most hilarious discussion I have had up to date just happened, I do however warn that I will come off as a man chauvinistic pig, but then this woman was REALLY annoying and loud on the subway:
M) You REALLY say women are better than men?
F) Yes!
M) At what?
F) What do you mean?
M) Well you have to be more specific, what are they better at, icehockey?
F) Well, obviously not...
M) So what other physical activity then? I grant you desert survival, but not much else, or?
F) Well, men are obviously have a greater physical capability than women, but women have greater mental abilities!!
M) So the greatest chess players are all women?
F) ... uhmm...
M) The greatest gô players?
F) What?
M) Nevermind, you wouldn't know what that is. Regardless, how many women do you know that beat their male peers at any of the activities with which we measure mental capability with?
F) But that is just because we have been pushed down for centuries!!
M) Centuries? Try ages, but last I checked we have had a functional math institution for decades, girls do better than boys in math up to university level, but then somehow the greatest minds in math at the top levels are still, guess what, men.
F) *quiet, but boiling... staring angrily at me*
M) Should I take that as, if we set aside everything both physical and mental, girls are as good as boys?
F) *tries to slap my face*
M) *catch her hand mid air as I saw it coming, pump her hand up and down 3 times going "Tuut Tuut TUUUT" like a train, and then release her.*
F) *storms off, one of her fiends shooting me an angry stare as they take off, the other one kicking my leg before skipping a few steps (like if I would kick her back)*
Don't get me wrong, I can count SO many situations where I would prefer to have a woman as back up rather than a man. But really, I have had enough of rampant Swedish feminists...

---

I full heartedly agree that women are better than men in certain situations. Heck, I think our Air Force pilots should be ALL women ,as they demonstratively can take higher G-force than men, thus can out-turn the men they are faced against.

However, and this is important, I want an EQUAL society.

Not a society where the state or any corporate FORCE equality, but a society where everyone can blossom to whatever heights they can reach.

If we really believe in "equality of mankind", we have to STOP giving women excuses for being less successful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Centuries? Try ages, but last I checked we have had a functional math institution for decades, girls do better than boys in math up to university level, but then somehow the greatest minds in math at the top levels are still, guess what, men.

---

Do you like the bubble you live in or when was the last time you seriously checked that?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ias-math-stem/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Researchers

When the prospective employers were only shown a candidate’s physical appearance, making their gender clear, they were twice as likely to hire a man than a woman. This was because women were expected to perform worse on the math problems, even though it was a task they were equally like to do well.
[...]
All signs point to heavy bias against women getting in the way.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Do you like the bubble you live in or when was the last time you seriously checked that?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ias-math-stem/

---

Could this mean employers, men as well as women, have an experience of women performing worse comparable to men?

Or are employers, male and female, automatically just chauvinistic pigs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Could this mean employers, men as well as women, have an experience of women performing worse comparable to men?

Or are employers, male and female, automatically just chauvinistic pigs?

---

Women, although strong independant and probably better than men when placed in positions of power have been so crushed and brainwashed by the Establishment that they start to act like men and oppress other women. It is a travesty that society can so quickly damage women to act in this manner - women instincitively know that a career break of 5 years teaches more life skills than doing any job could possibly do (including being a father or indeed a mother with child care arrangements) and it is troubling that this knowledge is suppressed in some manner.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Could this mean employers, men as well as women, have an experience of women performing worse comparable to men?

Or are employers, male and female, automatically just chauvinistic pigs?

---

Experience or social conditioning?
You seem like a fan of conditioning people to think women are inferior before they even get to know them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Researchers

The hurdles women face in entering these fields crop up at a young age. They are socialized to think women don’t go into science and math.

---

Also this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

My point is: Let's create an actual EQUAL society.

Letting women away with crazy whatever, trying to make everything 50/50 based solely on gender, excusing women for performing less well "as they are women"... IS JUST NO STEP FORWARD.

I as much cherish as look forward to a world where women are allowed to be women, and men are allowed to be men (and transgenders are allowed to do whatever transgenders do)... And we try to do our best for every individual to reach their individual capacity.

How damn hard can it be?

GAH!!

When my house burns down and I am about to die, I sure hope the fireMAN who carries me out have the muscles to do so.

When I leave my kid with a nurse for some treatment, I sure hope she has the emotional capacity to handle it well.

I'd hate to see that fireman or nurse out of a job because we would need some kind of gender equality.

I hope I have made myself clear.