Another Take About Feminism: Yes, We Live in a Patriarchy

[Nothanks700]

Feminism: The acknowledgement that women around much of the world do face, and have historically faced, several disadvantages to their male counterparts.

This, in a nutshell, is what all feminists agree on. But there are several different sects of feminism, some more extreme than others. And this, is likely the most awful, confused, and widespread myth about feminism: that they all hate men and are hell bent on only keeping them around for reproductive use (until they figure out a work-around:)

The types range from radical, to socialist, to liberal, and beyond. I'm not going to dive into every one. See Google for that info.

I would, however, like to acknowledge that many feminists believe a rather simple truth: we live in a patriarchal world dominated by men. Don't believe me? Of course not, so let's look at the facts. I'm going to concentrate on America, because its where I live, and I think nearly everyone can see the obvious oppression in the Middle East. But we still have work to do here, which is really the main debate I see on GAG, so anyway...facts:

Women who hold seats in Congress: 104 out of 535 (19.4%)

Stop. Even if you don't read anything after this paragraph, please consider that unbiased, unavoidable, unquestionable statistic. This is just literally a fact. Who makes the laws in this country? Males obviously. And from what perspective are those laws likely to represent? Male obviously. So WTF are you talking about when you say we don't live in a freaking patriarchy?

THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF PATRIARCHY!!!!!

Women earn 79 cents on the dollar to their male counterpart

Now here's the thing. Explain this away anyway you see fit (I'm sure some of you will), but it doesn't erase the fact that it's still true. Much of this (about 40%) can not be explained away by occupational differences, maternity, unions, or anything else. As for the rest, there is still a problem. Why is this the case? Why do women feel that they have to, or potentially need to, take occupations that pay less. School teaching and nursing, even psychology, among other fields, used to pay a lot more adjusted for inflation. Why? Because they were male dominated. Now that these professionals are dominated mostly by females, our society deems them less valuable. It's a cultural issue, and one that we all need to recognize before it can be remedied. Even still, this gender gap continues, and even widens, among more women getting college degrees than men.

Federal level judges who are women: 22%; Law school graduates who are women: 48%

Something isn't adding up here. Why are women receiving a ton of law degrees, and not getting the proportionate prestige jobs? Please, post your thoughts below.

Maybe I'll write another part to this, but I think this should start a discussion, so have at. Point is, fairness for women wasn't completely accomplished when they won the right to vote. I'm not one for forcing change through laws, but it's going to take a cultural shift, hopefully a lot quicker than it currently is.

[Jehovahkiin]

You’re operating under the assumption that laws in this country would have a systemic bias against women, to the point where it restricts the number of women found in congress. You don’t account for the possibility that women are less likely to run for office due to other reasons.
This report indicates other possible reasons.
www.American.edu/.../...-Rule-Report-final-web.pdf

Women and men get paid equally. It seems like we get paid less because the average female worker gets paid less due to the fact that more females are in less lucrative fields, along with working hours and experience. But I assume you already knew that.

The wage gap stems mainly from choice of jobs, not due to an inherent patriarchy culture that runs rampant in our society. If women find satisfaction from said jobs, I really don’t see what is the huge issue.

A study done by researchers of the Stockholm School of Economics indicated that 28.1% of females participants engaged in negotiation for salary, while the number was 42.5% for male participants. Within psychological literature I can explain this due to the fact that women tend to have more traits linking to neuroticism and agreeableness.
www.ne.su.se/.../anna_sandberg.pd
This further indicates another variable that plays a role in the “gender wage gap”.

No one is disputing that women are earning less and are getting into less lucrative careers.

We’re disputing that sexism is to blame. There is a difference.

Rape culture does not exist.

Systemic sexism against women does not exist.

The wage gap does not exist.

And apparently intelligence doesn't exist either.. at least for feminists.

Go home, you're drunk!

[Nothanks700]

I was about to say, thank you for your insightful reply and then reply to it with my own thoughtful answer.

Then I read the bottom part of your post and realized you are just as arrogant as the people calling me a 'mangina

[Jehovahkiin]

I was joking. O_O
I admit I am arrogant. But I’m never arrogant in a serious way. You can read my previous take for reference. I'm sorry if you thought I was insulting you. I totally wasn't ^_^

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Hey @Jehovahkiin

Will you marry me?

[Jehovahkiin]

@SnatchFinderGeneral dw you're my mistress ;)

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

does that mean you're taken then? Makes sense I guess.

Mistress it is then :P

[Jehovahkiin]

@SnatchFinderGeneral Nope. I'm not. Far from it! xD

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Oh. Then I'm claiming you. I found you first!

[Azara]

@Jehovahkiin
You’re operating under the assumption that laws in this country would have a systemic bias against women,

You are answering under the assumption you know how systemic 'isms' function. you are tossing words around and saying -no because i say so...

He covered every single thing you have raised so you either did not read his take or did not understand it. coming up with rationalizations does not change what exists. Your logic is basically poor people create poverty. rape victims create rape. the world exists is as it is simply bc of what individual people decide to do. as if you or amnion has that kind of power.

Why dont you start with what you started with. 'systemic sexism' how does it work? saying 'it would have to exist to the extent of something which it does not...' is not discounting the existence or even explaining it. since you brought it up why dont you finish. pigging backing off of his points is not discussing what you called systemic.

[Azara]

Why don't you take what you say seriously and follow through instead of calling him drunk. its easy to attack what other people say or copy what other people say...

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

@Azara I think you need to learn how to respect intelligent women. Misogynist.

[Azara]

@SnatchFinderGeneral

Intelligence does not earn respect. Intelligent arguments do. When i see one ill respect it.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

@Azara She gave a very intelligent argument, none of which you have attempted to address nor acknowledge. Instead you're strawmanning the fuck out of what systemic means, as if that somehow dismantles the rest of her argument.

But I expect nothing better from a feminist. I really don't. You see, feminists have gotten very far with false logic. But it's false logic none-the-less, and it's not going to carry you any further now that it's actually starting to affect people. Before it was a joke. Now it seems people actually take it seriously. It's dangerous. So now you can only watch as your fallacies crumble before actual logic.

[Nothanks700]

@SnatchFinderGeneral your name is "snatchfindergeneral" please just stop talking.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Yeah, because I guess your sense of humour went with your fucking balls when you became a male feminist you little bitch. Don't ever tell me what to do motherfucker.

[Azara]

@SnatchFinderGeneral

she gave recycled platitudes without considering what she's talking about and referring to. like 99% of people who pretend to discuss issues. especially when it concerns gender. and then made it personal by attacking the person who opened p the discussion she chose to join. that is self promotion not genuine interest in knowledge and sharing ideas. not worthy of respect.

[Nothanks700]

Fair enough. I'll go ahead and reply then. The main points of the white paper you posted (good paper btw) are the following:

"1. Women are substantially more likely than men to perceive the electoral environment as highly competitive and biased against female candidates.
2. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin’s candidacies aggravated women’s perceptions of gender bias in the electoral arena.
3. Women are much less likely than men to think they are quali ed to run for of ce.
4. Female potential candidates are less competitive, less con dent, and more risk averse than their male counterparts.
5. Women react more negatively than men to many aspects of modern campaigns.
6. Women are less likely than men to receive the suggestion to run for of ce – from anyone.
7. Women are still responsible for the majority of childcare and household tasis"

These all share a common theme: women perceive that politics is a mans world, and they feel they would not, or can not be accepted in it...

[Nothanks700]

The paper essentially just proves my points, with additional facts and insight.

Your second point: yes, I agree. The difference is that I see this as a problem. Although I don't agree that they get paid equally; you contradict that sentiment with the rest of your paragraph. The problem is cultural, not legal, as I stated. Why do female dominated positions pay less? One could argue that men and women are innately better at different things, which I don't disagree with. Women have higher emotional IQ on average compared to men, so HR makes sense. But why do we pay HR professionals so much less than finance professionals considering HR is arguably the most important facet of a company? We don't place as much value on occupations dominated by women in our country, a staple of patriarchy.

Your third point: yes, I agree that data is valid. But, again, this is a problem. Why do women feel that they can not approach their manager for a raise?

[Nothanks700]

.. I've seen studies similar to this before. They have also found that women feel social pressure not to ask for raises or promotions in male dominated fields, which makes sense.

Point and case: women often feel subordinate to men. That again, is a staple of a patriarchy. If most women took rise against patriarchy, it wouldn't exist. They make up too much of the population.

Your other points:

1. Yes, never said that wasn't the case, see my other point; it also doesn't explain about 40% of the pay gap, although things like not asking for raises might- still alive are problems
2. Its not overt sexism. It's institutionalized. Do you think people who put white only signs on thier storefronts considered themselves racist? It seems crazy now, but they did not think this. It's just the way things were. It is very similar to how push women out of certain occupations. It's no ones direct fault, but it's still happening. The only blame can be posted to people who won't accept the reality...

[Nothanks700]

3. Never actually said anything about rape culture. Since you bring it up though. I don't think most men think rape is okay. However many men don't seem to know what rape is. Date rape is the most common form of rape. I can cite several cases of you'd like where men literally tell the same story, from a different frame, of the night of the event as the woman. Yet the man continues to believe he did not rape anyone, while the law clearly sees that he did. This happens every single day in America. Men are not educated about what sexual boundriea are, and this is essentially what we refer to rape culture as. It doesn't mean men go around attacking women in the street.

4. See my other points. Yes it does.

5. Clearly it does, as multiple universities come to the same conclusions on the statistic every year within minor cents of each other. Entry level is usually the same for the same position, it's when pay is not standard that we see the difference...

[Nothanks700]

6. I graduated a top university with a 4.0 in finance, have written two novels, do stand up comedy, and make pretty good money. If I'm stupid, it must have worked for me. I've also never met a dumb feminist. It requires critical thinking. I have met a lot of really dumb anti-feminists though.

7. Not currently.

[Nothanks700]

@SnatchFinderGeneral haha. I'd find your name funny if you weren't declaring feminism to be illegitimate while having a username like that. It's a bit ridiculous.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Wow, you graduated in finance. Amazing. You must be one of a million other people who did the same thing, that requires literally no creative thinking whatsoever.

HAHA you do stand up. Fuck me son. I'm already funnier than you in this thread without even trying.

[Nothanks700]

@SnatchFinderGeneral 1. Not trying to be funny 2. You have not said a single funny thing 3. If you think finance require no creativity, you know nothing about it.

[Nothanks700]

@SnatchFinderGeneral kind of curious what you e done with your life tho bud, if you want to make this personal.

[Distant]

@Jehovahkiin, I believe we agree unanimously.

[Jehovahkiin]

@Azara No where does using a term imply that I have a deep understanding (or at all) of the things that constitute that specific term. As far as I’m concerning, if I can enunciate it, I am entitled to say it. My stance is essentially, “you don’t have definite evidence linking to your specific conclusions, so don’t assume”. Srs. I’m not assuming anything, lady.

Rationalizations in my argument were to demonstrate that there isn’t an intrinsic sexism against women in the system, at least for the reasons he mentioned. And that there isn’t an inherent problem in our system against women, unlike what he suggested.
Lol. No. Super-strawman. How is my argument remotely analogous to the idea of those things? My argument stems from the idea that everything OP is saying is totally a non-issue. Feminism creates a problem when there is literally none.

[Jehovahkiin]

@Azara I would, if I were actually writing an essay/myTake regarding the ridiculousness of feminism in N. America. But the reason I am “pigging backing” off his points is because my arguments are made as rebuttals, not as a detailed analysis concerning this ‘systemic sexism’, as portrayed by feminists. Go learn.

I would respond longer, but I’m kinda busy. But you should understand someone’s arguments before trying to jump at their throats.

by the way, you're drunk. Go home!

[Jehovahkiin]

-OP
Your initial stance regarding women in congress is that laws created by men benefit women. I’m demonstrating why this isn’t necessarily the case, and you have not provided any evidence whatsoever that said laws actually do benefit men over women.

You don’t have to nitpick something so trivial. You and I know what I truly mean. Women receive same pay assuming all variables are accounted for. But, as an average, they do not. Because of the aforementioned factors above. Female dominated positions tend to pay less because those jobs are innately less lucrative than male. An example of patriarchy would insinuate that female-dominated occupations are being paid less BECAUSE they are women. Which isn’t the case at all. In the off chance it somehow were, your crew doesn’t do a good job at enunciating these ‘facts’.

[Jehovahkiin]

You keep making blatant assumptions in your arguments. But never take the time to establish coherent reasoning and evidence for said arguments. You imply that “A appears to be so, therefore B must have caused no”. Not it doesn’t, dummy. B would definitely have caused it, assuming all other factors (X, Y, Z) are taken into the equation, which you didn’t bother to come close to even doing. A is a possibility, but we know X, Y and Z already play a role; and there is no evidence for A
Women feel as subordinates to men? From the premise that because males are dominant in that field? Sorry, egregious non-sequitur. Try again.

1 Lol it does. The “pay gap” is derived from the average difference between women and men’s aggregate earnings. If one gender gets paid less due to less hours and being in a less lucrative career, IT ALREADY accounts for why there is a 40% or so discrepancy.

[Jehovahkiin]

2. the stats actually point the other way. the law itself is inherently more bias against men than women.

3. don’t think you understand the concept of “rape culture” coined by feminists. Simply put, the term is the idea that N. American culture someone glorifies rape and blames the victim; instead of the opposite. A man having a skewed moral compass concerning rape is no evidence of the existence of rape culture.

4. Nuh uh!

5 Not it doesn’t. People (feminists) who don’t understand the matter at hand claim it does!

[Jehovahkiin]

6 On a serious note, intelligence (according to the psychological definition) isn’t a requirement to success. Intelligence only contributes to 15% or so to overall success. Even that, when I say ‘intelligence’, I don’t mean in it’s formal definition, I’m talking about the conventional meaning. Essentially, people who are unintelligent say or do really dumb stuff -> Ben Carson is a brilliant neurosurgeon, but stupid for someone who doesn’t believe in evolution.
Tho, if you’ve never met a dumb feminists, then you clearly are not paying attention or are blatantly biased.
Even then, I wasn’t being serious. So keep your bragging down at a minimum xD

7 You’re totally drunk tho, go home!

I had more to say but had to cut it short, because I need to study for my test tmr.

[Nothanks700]

Lol, ok. I don't think we'll ever agree. And yes, I went a little far with the bragging- you kind of pushed my buttons so congrats on that. Good luck on the test.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Actually, YOU made this personal. For someone who talks so brashly about critical thinking, you sure like to neglect it.

But since you ASKED, I am a 2D artist, a 3D artist, and animator, have programmed in numerous different codes, am an anatomist having full knowledge of the entire musculo-skeletal system, and practice microbiology fr fun. I also learned deliberately learned critical thinking skill out of my interest in science for pleasure. Most of my education is self directed, but I have a degree in animation. I also have a vast general knowledge, as proven by my membership in a clan of quizmasters, that just happens to be the best in the world in the game.

It won't be long before I'm character designing for major computer games. I don't care how much money that makes me. But it's probably going to be pretty good.

[Nothanks700]

@SnatchFinderGeneral that's a really interesting career path. As I said I got carried away with the bragging in the one statement, was just aggravated.

[Jehovahkiin]

OP
Ty.
That's okay. I'm still right!

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Thanks. Nice work on the novels and stand-up. Keep it up :)

[Distant]

What a sad white knight. You mentioned "THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF PATRIARCHY!!!". Actually, the definition of patriarchy is: "a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.". Women are NOT excluded from positions of power in the West. If you don't believe me, look at Germany. Hell, look at the stats you just posted. 1/5 people in the house / senate are women - how is that "the definition of patriarchy"?

Women do not earn 77 cents on the dollar. This is EARNINGS - not WAGES. It has been illegal to pay men and women the same since 1963 during the Equal Pay Act. Women earn less because they tend to choose lower paying jobs, take more time off and work less overtime. Many, many FEMALE scholars would disagree with you, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58arQIr882w

You keep mentioning "culture" but has it ever occurred to you that men and women are different? It's a myth that we're the exact same and that our differences are due to culture. If you don't believe me, look no further than the trans community. They feel they are born in the wrong body (ie. their minds don't match their bodies). Why? Because there IS such a thing as a male brain and a female brain and therein lies the differences in the choices we make.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-6usiN4uoA

[Distant]

to pay men and women differently*

[Nothanks700]

Please stop using the term 'white night;' it's immature and sexist, and didn't exactly make me feel open about the rest of your opionion.

Germany has progresses much more than is in terms of equality. Similar to us, having a black president for instance did not cite racism overnight, nor does having a female chancellor cure sexism- but I frankly don't know enough about German culture to make a fair judgement. The post was on the US.

Women being LARGELY excluded is what is going on. 1/5 is an abysmally small representation. Put this in perspective. Say it was you and 9 other people in a small village. You and 4 others were of the mindset your village should expand, and the other 5 were of the mindset it should not. But for whatever reason, only 1 of your members got to vote, while 4 of the other members voted. Which direction do you think the village is headed? I'm not saying women all have the same mindsets, pr even close. But suggesting that...

[Careless_Whisper]

You are aware that women have more rights and privileges than men in the West? Stop being a white knight and mangina.

[Nothanks700]

... men can genuinely write laws from a female perspective is naive. Why do you think GAG is around. Men and woman are different obviously, and we need fair representation from both angles.

I said 79 cents, and that is wages. 60% can be ascribed to occupational differences. But again, there is still a problem here. I said at the final part of my post, I don't believe in forcing cultural change through laws, it doesn't solve the root problem. "Woman earn less because they tend to choose lower paying jobs." Yes I agree, but why? This is clearly a cultural issue where either barriers to entry exist for women, or women feel that they can not pursue those tracts (again a barrier to entry).

I realize men and women are different, thanks. Interesting to note that emotional IQ has been proven by several Harvard studies, among others, to be far more effective in management than innate intelligence. Women on average have higher emotional IQ, yet the vast majority of CEOs are men...

[Nothanks700]

Why? Because we still promote men over women in our society, even if a woman is technically better suited for the position. The fair pay act was more of a statement; it's very difficult to actually pursue anything legally, and would basically get you blacklisted from employment.

Finally, and this is the most important point. The fact that I'm male, has quite literally nothing to do with anything. I don't care that your scholars are 'female.' If a black person came out tomorow and slavery was fine by him; I'd still think he was an idiot. It doesn't change anything. A key staple of a patriarchal society, is that most women also give into the patriarchy,.

[Nothanks700]

@Careless_Whisper please allude on your point. Saying it doesn't make it so...

[Distant]

""Woman earn less because they tend to choose lower paying jobs." Yes I agree, but why? This is clearly a cultural issue where either barriers to entry exist for women, or women feel that they can not pursue those tracts (again a barrier to entry).

I realize men and women are different, thanks."

You're contradicting yourself. If you rightly believe that mean and women are different and have different brains, wouldn't they have different goals and priorities? Why does the difference in job choice by gender have to be a cultural "barrier to entry", as you're insisting, instead of a difference between genders?

[Kylesar]

A patriarchy: A society run by males for males where women are second-class citizens.
Firstly, the very fact that a woman is running for president pretty much dismantles this statement.

#1: The House and the Senate are both elected. By who? THE PEOPLE. Who makes up the majority of voters? WOMEN. If all women voted for one candidate, that candidate would probably get in office. I mean, yea, it's an unavoidable fact, but that proves nothing.

#2: Not this shit again. It's known that a wage gap exists. However, 79% is NOT that number. Like most feminists, you can't seem to agree to what extent is the wage gap. The number contradicts the studies. Next you do a blatant false cause, saying that because women came in, the pay goes down. Haven't you ever considered supply and demand? Everyone's getting a degree in everything. Degrees are starting to lose their special-ness as so many people enter careers. The numbers are so high, there is a surplus, thus lowering the prices, thus lowering the pay. When something is more rare, it's more valuable. If gold is as common as salt, do you think it'd be just as valuable as it is now? If half the population is a psychologist, do you think it'd be just as valuable as it was back then?

Also by your logic, we live in a matriarchy because men stay away from jobs dominated by women (nursing, teaching, etc.). Terrible logic

#3: So so many things wrong here, but I'll just say 1. You assume that everyone who goes to law school wants to be a federal-level judge. Not the case. It's been shown that men are more risk-taking than women are. They're far more likely to choose career over personal life. Women are more likely to choose their personal life over their careers, staying in a lower paying sect than men. This is also a factor of the wage gap, which you conveniently glossed over

To sum this up, you hold the typical fallacious feminist position: 2 of 3 points say men dominate whatever aspect, so patriarchy. The last one is the typical beating of the long-dead horse. You take facts, remove context, add your own, and say "because muh patriarchy."

No... Wage Gap (on the basis of sexism) is Bullshit
Rape Culture is Bullshit
Systematic Sexism is Bullshit
Patriarchy is Bullshit.

Women are equal to men and fast approaching superiority. Just because we don't have equality of outcome, it doesn't mean women are oppressed.

[Nothanks700]

1. Ah, yes. You know a black man is our president, there must not be racism anymore either. Let's forget the fact that any major female candidate so far has received about 10 times the scrutiny as any male candidate.

2. I don't know if you have a strong command of logic. 79 cents on the dollar is the number by most recent studies. Some take things like occupational difference into account and move it up to the low 90 cents. As I mentioned, that leaves about 40% that can not be explained.

Supply and demand would make sense, if there wasn't also a rise in demand. Graduate studies have not increased at the rate undergrad studies have, so psychiatrists in all states, and psychologists in mists are still in high demand. Nurses are in extremely high demand. Teachers vary by state. Yet, even with higher demand, these jobs pay less- that isn't matriarchy.

[Nothanks700]

3. No, I don't assume everyone that goes to law school wants to be a federal level judge. Women also account for a very small portion of state level judges, but again I never assumed everyone wants to be a judge, just that it's disproportionate.

now you have a point with women wanting to not pursue careers as opposed to family. But why is this? There is clearly social pressure for women to pursue this path, and social pressure for men to pursue the opposit. This is an issue of our culture. It is snake that eats it's tale. Because women feel pressure to conform, they do, and the women who want to strike out often do not because it is tremendously difficult to make it In a field of the opposite gender dominating.

Your other points were addressed in other comments

However, women are approaching superiority? We must not live on the same planet, least of all the same country.

[Distant]

I love how the asker keeps using this argument " Ah, yes. You know a black man is our president, there must not be racism anymore either." drawing a false equivalency. We're talking about systematic exclusion of women from positions of power - not about common sexism.

Does racism exist? Yes. Are blacks systematically excluded from positions of power? Obviously, not. Again, not talking about common racism. Don't conflate the two.

[Nothanks700]

@Distant I'm not conflating the two. I realize sexism can exist while patriarchy does not, and I realize racism can exist without living in a racially oppressive society. The opinion stated that the very fact a woman is running for president eliminates patriarchy. This makes as much sense as saying a black president eliminates a racially oppressive society.

[Distant]

If women are not excluded from positions of power then, by definition, we are not living in a patriarchy which is in direct conflict with your title "Yes, we live in a patriarchy". No, we do not. We may live in a society where sexism exists on the individual level and women are not yet (and many never be) represented in equal numbers in the governing body but that is NOT a patriarchy.

[Kylesar]

A member of a group running for president does dismantle any claims that they're oppressed systematically.

If black people were racially oppressed by white people, a black person wouldn't be able to run for president.

Yes racism still exists, but racial OPPRESSION (as you state) doesn't, just like sexist OPPRESSION doesn't. You equated sexist oppression with common racism ("must not be racism anymore"). No. A racially oppressive society doesn't exist

Patriarchy is a sexist OPPRESSIVE society. That's pretty much the entire point any discussion about it tries to push

You're hopping around twisting terminology. First you say. "there must not be racism anymore." Then you say in your response. "eliminates a racially oppressive society." Those are not the same thing, hence your false equivalency

[Anonymous]

First off im 100% for women making money$$$$. and equality and not arguing again st the claim.

My mother and father are in the same profession and she destroys him in income 3 fold easy. Because of this he is more likely to not work and take the dog out, do the bills, water the lawn, etc... therefore he doesn't have the time to make the money. I was looking at stats of it and why the graphs show they make less that doesn't tell us where these women have these jobs compared to the men. Another thing they don't mention is that men are more inclined to ask for raises. I asked every year. They did a study where they did blind interviews and made women sound like men and vice verse. I believe it was a feminist group running the study and not an "official study" but some food for thought. But the men still did better in the interviews. Just something to ponder.

My sister also has no issue with her job. I've personally never encountered it anywhere I've worked. But who knows. If there was state by state same job/title/qualifications breakdown that'd be good to see.

[Redstang88]

Your facts are true, but your understanding of them is a little off.
Simple fact is there are still imbalances between the sexes because we still get to choose what we do.
Women earn less because (on average) they work less hours and are less likely to take risks and push for promotion.
As for judges and senators- women have every right and opportunity to be there, but they choose not be.

There are simple biological differences between the sexes that will never change, therefore there will always be imbalances in certain areas.

[Nothanks700]

Again, 40% of that statistic can not be explained away by occupational differences, pushing for promotions, etc. but the other 60% is still a problem. Why do we place less value on female dominated careers. As I pointed out, teachers and nurses were paid much more when they were male dominated careers.

Judges and senators: that's bull. Women run for office and judgeships all the time. They are beat out by less qualified men all too frequently.

I agree ofcousrre their are biological differences. I'm talking about the big picture here.

[Jeeevan]

This is a stupid myTake, so it's sexist if a woman chooses not to go into the government or a job which is mostly run by men? That's like me saying it's sexist that almost 80% of HR jobs are done by women. Women in western countries are equal to men however both men and women still have a few inequalities which will and can be fixed in the future. In third world countries i agree that there isn't really inequality for anyone including men.

[Nothanks700]

Thank you for calling my mytake stupid, what a th outfit response. You can make that argument for some occupations, women may very well be better at HR for instance than men, and the other way around for some other jobs. But we are talking about our lawmaking bodies here. They have tremendous impact on our lives, and for women to be so disproportionately represented is assanine.

[Jeeevan]

Your points aren't valid, it's not sexism if most government roles are done by men, it's not sexist if most government roles were done by women, at the end of the day they all do the same shit as each other no amatter the gender.

[Kuraj]

And here I thought I'm finally going to see some constructive points to change my mind about feminism.
Nope, still see the old baseless biased fallacious bullcrap.

[Nothanks700]

Ok then, I'll just go tell these literal facts to get lost. You can't spin these, they just are. If this doesn't change your mind about feminism. You are always going to be blind to discrimination

[Leaflar]

The problem isn't that the facts are wrong. It is that you don't understand what they actually mean.

[Nothanks700]

@Leaflar ok. Please enlighten me.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Women face natural disadvantage. It's not 'patriachy' keeping them down.

Women NEED a patriarchy in order to even have equality. As soon as women started taking that for granted, reality started slapping them in the face. It's just that most of you haven't got the message yet.

[Nothanks700]

Yeah, that's just flat out mysogeny. Good luck with that

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

MISOGYNYYYYYYYY!!!

Seriously, are you really that retarded, or have you practiced appearing so?

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

I mean, you can;t even spell the fucking word.

[Nothanks700]

Lmfao! Who cares if I made a typo. Put down an intelligent comment or don't. People who comment on minor spelling errors on non-editable posts clearly have self esteem issues, and need to make themselves feel better.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Yeh ok. I have self esteem issues. REALLY BAD SEFL ESTEEM ISSUES.

And people who can't spell have never moved beyond the intellectual capacity of a 6 year old.

[Nothanks700]

I make good money for having the intellectual capacity of a 6 year old. So I guess that's fine with me.

[SnatchFinderGeneral]

Good for you! I can't wait until some slag makes you her chump and seizes all your 'good money'. I mean, it's only money right?

[Nothanks700]

Lol. Ok bud.

[Melcart23]

feminism isn't needed in countries that are developed like the US and so on. its only needed in countries like those in the middle east where women are unbelievably oppressed.. im sorry ladies of the first world but you women aren't oppressed

[Nothanks700]

How do you propose we address these issues then?

No ones arguing that women in the Middle East have it far worse; I mentioned that in the post.

What I am saying, is that our culture is still very much rooted in patriarchy and women are not on equal footing here.

[Melcart23]

i dont believe patriarchy= inequality

[Nothanks700]

Patriarchy literally is in equality. It's male dominated society. I don't think you know what the word means.

[Melcart23]

in my case, my father is the head of my household and my mom is as free and equal as any guy you know... patriarchy is not oppression

[Nothanks700]

Your situation Is anecdotal. And you can argue that we don't live in a patriarchy, you can't really argue that a patriarchy isn't biased to men, that's litteraly what it is

[Melcart23]

i come at this from a point of view of the bible... that type of system is in the bible, yet men and women are equal in the eyes of god.. one sex will always be better suited at certain things than the other.. i just dont see women as being oppressed the way you do

[Nothanks700]

Ok, well that explains it.

[Careless_Whisper]

What a lying white knight. Look up the equal pay act. It's illegal to pay a woman less than a man for doing the same job. And yes, most of those in power are men. But these men in power are changing the laws to benefit women, so please stop pulling shit out of your ass. The rest of what you said was just dishonest drivel, not worthy of a reply.

[Nothanks700]

Lol. I think it's a tad ironic that you don't realize how sexist calling me a 'white night' is simply because I'm a male posting a pro feminist stance. The rest of what I said are litteraly facts; there's no arguing them. The other two statistics are just as valid as the first. But you go ahead and continue to live in your ignorant and delusional world.

[Careless_Whisper]

They're no acts, they're lies. Look up the equal pay act. White knight lol.

[Nothanks700]

Ok, what about it? Yes, I realize the equal pay act exists. What's your point? Are you really dim witted enough to believe that an act alone miraculously cured sexism? I never said they were acts. They are valid statistics. Does something have to be a congressionally approved law to be a fact anymore? Your logic is one of the weirdest hints I've experienced on GAG

[Careless_Whisper]

The equal pay act disproves the ignorant drivel that you've been pulling out of your ass. Typical white knight.

[Nothanks700]

Yeah you keep saying that, but don't elaborate on how. I think that you think, saying 'white knight' in literally every comment of yours is getting under my skin. Really it just cements my initial opinion that you don't have two brain cells to rub together. I really can't argue with idiocy, so this will be my final note to you.

[Careless_Whisper]

I've already explained why. Can't you read?

[Thisperson98]

So just because there is less women in the government, the government is sexist? Also is it sexist that more men want to be lawyers and judges?

[Nothanks700]

Lol. More men don't want to be judges and lawyers, more of them just are. Please actually read the statistic.

[Anonymous]

You're gonna get disagreements here in gag in 3 2 1

[Azara]

its taking quite a while.. i think bc he did such a straight forward decent job at the take. focused on the fact of things and at the fact of the fact not getting side traced or defensive about why the facts exist. its a good strategy bc usually the disagreements come in the form of explaining away facts with different excuses. he already pointed out any rationalization won't change the fact -which is true.

he also gives the impression he's genuinely interested in a discussion, which is rare.

well done ciil direct well formed.. Its a good take. with so few responses :)

[Careless_Whisper]

@Azara Yet almost everything he said was a lie. But then again, feminists are famous for telling lies.

[Nothanks700]

@Careless_Whisper please let me know what I lied about?

[Jeeevan]

Everything.

[Nothanks700]

@Jeeevan ok? What specifically. All three of these are just literal facts. You can google them and you will get the same answers- cut and dry, there isn't any debate. It's like if I said the sky was blue; if you argue with it, you're an idiot. Now you can argue with me saying the sky being blue relates to the production of chocolate or something, but the fact is the fact, there isn't any denying it.

[Jeeevan]

Those two senearios do not go together, he sky is blue, that's a actual fact whereas what you listed isn't facts.

[Nothanks700]

@Jeeevan oh, so women don't account for 20% of congress. You know, me and all of America must have miscounted - sorry about that.

[Jeeevan]

When did I say 20% of women didn't makeup congress? I'm just saying that it isn't sexist if women do not make up 50% just like it wouldn't of been sexist if males didn't make up 50% of congress. All of these people in government have similar objectives

[Nothanks700]

@Jeeevan you said everything I said was a lie. I made some opinions about 3 facts. There were no lies.

[Jeeevan]

Every point you made was false. Honestly, I'm bored and tired of arguing with you or whatever this is.

[Nothanks700]

@Jeeevan oh, you're 16. At least you have an excuse for your ill command of the English language

[Jeeevan]

Lol ok. You can believe what you want and I'll believe the facts.