Pay Equity

I was going through my “blog later” list and realised that this issue had come up again recently in some blogs.

So it seems like a good time to post this from No Minister.

I saw the imbecilic press release from the Pay Equity Challenge Coalition last week, in which it’s claimed that women are effectively working for free until the end of the year because women on average earn 12% less than men, but didn’t plan to write anything about it (other than leaving a comment at the Hand Mirror suggesting the coalition get some members who understand statistics).

However, “not writing about it” was before I realised that a group of women at my workplace, some of whom will earn more than I do for a similar job (through longer service), featured in the local newspaper in a protest claiming they’re being made to work for free until the end of the year because I, along with the other testicle-equipped, am supposedly ripping them off for 12% of their “deserved” salary.

I could forgive this. Many people fail to understand what the term “average” means and there is a general ignorance in society of how to interpret statistics, so it’s not that surprising people should make the mistake. What’s unforgivable: it’s definitely unsurprising they should make that mistake when the women’s group rep organising the protest is a [expletive] social sciences lecturer.

So… someone is complaining  (on the basis of a stasticial average) that they get paid less than a man for the same work, when in fact she gets paid more.

I never have any idea what my colleges get paid, but at my last job we were discussing this and I was told by my female colleague that I should be paid more since I actually was better at the job.

Which just serves to remind one that what feminists say should not be taken as the view of women generally.

Feminists Attack Women

“You guys have come full circle here in the United States of Amercia. Now it’s ok as feminists to ridicule women for the way they look.”

Well, as long as they’re conservative women – as Gloria Feldt says, they’re fair game.

The Carrie Prejean story is a disgrace. But the disgrace is not what she said – she told the truth when asked and did it with respect.

The disgrace is firstly the reaction of someone who is meant to be judging the character of these young women showing himself to be the polar opposite of someone with character. Worse, the pageant organisers made clear that, far from regretting their choice, they sided with him.

Secondly, it’s about the US media covering that up. Several MSM outfits in the US had Prez on their shows, and never mentioned his outburst.

Third, it’s about people who should be standing for free speech and women’s rights turning against those things, without the slightest hint of shame.

Feminism Fails

Browsing through The Hand Mirror, I came across this:

The last noxious quote was from the one and only Pat Buchanan, who also wrote:

The real liberators of American women were not the feminist noise-makers; they were the automobile, the supermarket, the shopping center, the dishwasher, the washer-dryer, the freezer.

What a swell guy.

Lucyna Maria replied pointing out the obvious. Well, obvious to normal people…

I dislike Buchanan for a whole separate set of reasons, so after thinking for a couple of minutes, I think he’s right. Just imagine no supermarket or car or dishwasher or washing machine. The supermarket’s a biggie – all the food you could possibly want in one place. In days gone past it was up to the woman to prepare enough food for the family, and that took a lot of time and hard work. Women needed men around in order to be able to physically grow and catch food, now we just need a job or a dpb payment.

But that’s not enough it seems.

Anna said…

L-M, you’re right in that all these things have made the lives of people easier, particularly the lives of those who carry out the domestic work. But the fact that it’s women who continue to do the vast majority of this work – a fact Mr Buchanan clearly has no problem with – that’s objectionable. So long as women get little or no help with domestic work, and have their life choices restricted by bearing sole responsibility for this work, modern labour-saving devices are only a very partial ‘liberation’.

Emphasis mine.

Now, is it just me, or has a feminist just admitted the complete failure of their movement? It seems that Buchanan is right – feminism has not made the slightest difference, the only improvements are from technology.

(Then there’s the whole issue of lawn mowing, oil changing, car cleaning… – I don’t see any feminists complaining that men are over represented in these areas. While I’ve helped my wife with work around the house on occasion, she’s not once mowed the lawn or cleaned the car.)

Pick that Jaw up off the Floor

Tumeke! has been toying with the border of antisemitism throughout the week, so I guess Tim Selwin thought he’s change tack and engage in some all-out sexism.

I’ve just seen a story that lacks the crucial and most obviously necessary data.
– There is a 90% chance you are reading a story by a female journalist.

There’s no attempt in the article to provide an answer or explanation for what has happened.
– There is a 85% chance you are reading a story by a female journalist.

The author uses first person (I and Me and My) and never lets up, turning the assignment into a story about themselves.
– There is an 80% chance you are reading a story by a female journalist.

The author fails to put whatever has happened, or whatever things they are talking about into any meaningful context or perspective.
– There is an 70% chance you are reading a story by a female journalist.

Are all female journalists like this?
– No, of course not.

Are all male journalists unlike this?
– Pretty much, yes.

Maybe he’s trying to show that feminists also like the “hang ‘em high” slogan?

Maybe he’s suicidal? If so, I can suggest far less painful ways to go.

Or may be he just wants lots of comments to keep up his weekly comment count?

Idiotic Discrimination Claim of the Day

Oh this is so beyond stupid:

“Question 10. Women do the vast majority of cooking and shopping, and increases in food prices are a burden borne disproportionately by women.”

The money you spend on food has nothing to do with how often you shop, or how often you cook.

It’s how much you eat. Men are bigger. Men eat more. They have to pay for more food, ergo price increases affect them more.

Women might buy it, but in most cases men will be paying for what they eat, and more often paying for the woman than the other way around. (I hasten to add that in our house and most houses, no one “pays” for the other to eat as we are married – there is no “my” money or “her” money.)

But I guess if you can find some angle where you can call women victimised, go for it and to heck with reality and logic.

Feminists, not Palin Set Women Back

There’s been some particularly nasty stuff against Palin lately.

NewsBusters sums it up after pulling apart the latest attempt.

I think the selection of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate has proven one thing: leftist women are not qualified to write political analysis. These lefty female writers just aren’t experienced enough with politics to write commentary. They haven’t seen enough, read enough, been through enough to be able to do anything other than name call, spew bile and regurgitate prosaic talking points without any meaning. They are so steeped in only their one-sided ideological dogma that they are utterly blind to all other matters. According to this narrow, leftist only worldview if you don’t believe in abortion, you’re not wrong, you’re evil. Don’t believe in socialism? You’re not wrong, you’re evil. You’ve gotten elected anyway? You’re obviously a Machiavellian manipulator who people would never vote for if they really knew what you really stood for… and you’re not just wrong, you’re evil.

There is no capacity of these blind partisans to see that there are millions of Americans that don’t view the world through the same red colored glasses that their aging hippy university professors fitted them with. They haven’t the capacity to analyze the American political landscape. They can only squeeze everything they see through that little red book that contains all their talking points.

These female journos are simply out of their depth when attempting to actually comment about anything other than their own, socialist opinion. When it comes to analyzing politicians they are simply too parochial in their viewpoint and cannot see the forest for the trees.

Yes, these women writers set women back decades.

Equality isn’t here yet

Apparently we don’t have equality yet.

Apparently there’s even a poll showing one third of women think so.

Here’s the thing.

If I setup a test for something and took 50 men and 50 women and gave them the option of taking that test and gain a reward at the end, one would expect that they’d all do that in equal numbers. Ok so far, we have equality.

Then, I say the test involves running some distance. To be fair, we base this on the fitness of the applicants. But then we say that you have a 25% chance of being attacked halfway along that run.

We all know that more women than men would pull out.

So why do we consider that with only 29% of women in the police is a “bad thing”? Women make a choice, and more choose not to put themselves into a job that involves a good chance of being beaten up on the job. I don’t blame them.

What if we changed that, and made the criteria 10+ years of hard work and long hours? That’s what you need to get into many top jobs. Women want to have families and care for their own children.

Now, you might say “you need more than hard work to get into top jobs”. I agree – and that’s where the problem is.

Just pointing blind at statistics and saying “here’s a problem” is just stupid. There’s a lot more to these statics than that – there are reasons why certain jobs attract women, and why certain jobs attract men.  for example, IS complains that NZAX companies are “more sexist” than NZX companies, but in reality NZAX companies are usually startups that involve a lot more risk and women are more risk averse then men (because they have brains, mainly!).

But it seems that simple common sense should never get in the way of a good leftist rant about how evil the world is.

Ah, Men

Hm, what was it I said last night?

But vilifying your opponents is always a good tactic if you can’t come to a debate with solid rational arguments. Works for Winston anyway.

I guess this counts. (Seen first on No Minister)

Gee thanks Right to Life, for putting abortion back on the agenda this election year. Most people were pretty happy about the fact that although the law didn’t reflect practice it did reflect what society was ok with. Ah well, I wasn’t really planning on doing anything else for the rest of the year anyway.

The picture is from the UK but so far it seems to hold pretty true for Right to Life’s Ken Orr and Family First’s Bob McCoskrie…

That photo in particular is funny on so many levels!

1. Most anti-abortion supporters are women. Most men actually support abortion, since it means they don’t have to be held up for child support when they sleep around.
2. I doubt very much that 77% of the “leaders” are men either.
3. I’ve yet to meet a man yet who’s in a leadership position in an anti-abortion or similar organization who’s wife is not even more concerned about the issue than her husband. I’m quite sure that Bob’s and Ken’s wives are both very, very strong supporter of their husbands’ position.
4. Finally, only a feminist of the most radical bent thinks it’s an insult to call someone a man![Point removed, as Julie did not say this – there is a hint of implication in the picture, but it appears that people may have the wrong idea from what I’ve written here. – S1]

I’m not saying that the anti-abortion cause has majority support. I understand only too well that society does not treasure unborn life. I do believe that that is changing as the real pain and damage that abortion causes to women becomes clearer to an increasing number of people willing to approach the issue with an open mind.

Teacher Sues Students

Ran into this on WordPress – one of the advantages of operating on a large blogging platform like this one.

Absolutely insane.

Oh, the horrors!

After a winter of discontent, the snapping point came while Ms. Venkatesan was lecturing on “ecofeminism,” which holds, in part, that scientific advancements benefit the patriarchy but leave women out. One student took issue, and reasonably so – actually, empirically so. But “these weren’t thoughtful statements,” Ms. Venkatesan protests. “They were irrational.” The class thought otherwise. Following what she calls the student’s “diatribe,” several of his classmates applauded.

Ms. Venkatesan informed her pupils that their behavior was “fascist demagoguery.” Then, after consulting a physician about “intellectual distress,” she cancelled classes for a week. Thus the pending litigation.

Considering the fact that most teachers would be thrilled to have their students so engaged in a lecture that they ask questions, one must wonder what Ms. Venkatesan found so objectionable. Having taken a few literary theory classes himself, the Beast thinks he knows the problem.

Literary theory is crap. When one must teach crap, one gets a little defensive about challenges, because there is no good defense available. This is particularly galling for feminists.

Rape and Responsiblity

If you feel like crossing over to a land where up is down and green is brown, have a look at this thread on Mia’s blog where among the wild and bizarre accusations thrown out by the feminists, the current final comment reads…

I think the ideological point of view you mention Dave, is the crazy idea that when rape happens in our society it is more than just one “nasty” person attacking someone, but a reflection of the sexist regime we live under.
Is it that crazy to assert that men should change their behaviour (ie stop raping women) rather than women changing theirs?
Because that is something that is not being said on ads on tv or anywhere else in the mainstream – so its good to see it said here.
MEN STOP RAPING WOMEN!

She then agrees with a previous commenter who likened the idea that “women should be careful when drinking” to telling women that their privates are like an ipod – a “piece of property”. Hm, next time my wife tells me not to go out drinking lest I get my head cracked open on the pavement after a drunken fight, I’ll try that line – “My head is not property like an ipod”!

It’d be great if we could stop rape*. Fantastic. Sadly there are evil people in the world and we have to live with that reality. It’s no use standing in front of a freight train saying “it would be morally wrong for that train driver to hit me”. It doesn’t matter how right or wrong something is, some things are just reality.

A valid point is made during the debate that of all the drinkers, only the woman is a victim – and all 3 are blamed for what happened. Except the blame is only in the eye of the beholder, it’s created in the minds of these bloggers, and they take that to bizarre extremes, vastly beyond anything the creators of the ads had in mind – warning people about drinking too much.

One of the commentors has a post on another blog where she says:

I won’t go over the points that Maia has made, but I did want to add one more issue about the ad and the rape myths it perpetuates – namely that stranger rape in a dark alley (whether you are drunk or sober) is How Rape Happens. Actually most rapists know their victims, often already very intimately. Strangers are not usually the real danger.

This one reminds me of the guy who walked onto a plane with a fake bomb, thinking the odds of 2 bombs being on board were astronomical.

That’s not how statistics work. If statistics show that most rapes are from people known to the victim, that doesn’t change the danger of a woman being drunk in a bar by herself. This ad points out that danger, the fact that there is a danger of being a victim of the same crime in a different way has nothing to do with it.

*It’d be even better if these bloggers spent their time working on ways to stop rape in the real world.