Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

[Tali]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

"somehow" i just KNEW levon was going to say something..

Here we go...

[B]
You can thank feminism for that.

Did you know that back when families were actually catered to (more than 50 years ago), a man with a family would get priority over a young single man because he had a family to support. Nowadays, if anything, only women and some minorities are catered to, regardless of whether they have families or not. In fact, most professional women dont and probably never will have families.

Actually, no. It wasn't feminism. Though that's an easy scapegoat. it was the idea that women can now do men's work, but not INSTEAD of women's work. it's only in addition to.

A man with a family still gets more priority over a single man. A woman with a family gets more priority than the man because the man's role is not to care for the family (cook, feed, clothe) - it's to give money to his wife to go do all the legwork. if a man asks to get off work to go pick up his kids it's frowned upon. however, if a woman does it, that's fine.

many professional women actually have families, but their husbands are either stay at home, or work part-time, or have flexible jobs.

Congratulations, you're a model superwoman. This is what feminists wanted, so don't complain as you have everything a feminist would have wanted you to have. Be proud, you are now a slave to your job and have the same responsibilities as men have for ages. You shouldn't be complaining. After all, hasn't work freed you from having to be an oppressed housewife?

The problem Levon when you read anything from a woman working hard is that you take it as complaining. I'm stating how my life is. If I thought i couldn't handle it, i would take less units or quit one of my jobs. Since I have three, i'm not slave to one. I do not have the same responsibilities of men, I have more. And no, work certainly has not freed me from being a housewife. I take care of my family too (i even listed some that i take care of). In addition to studying and working, I care for the house, the pets. I stay on top of the yards too. I also have to ensure i'm community-involved to uphold my father's obligations to his work. I also help my father with his master's degree program.

Nop, only if you're a woman, and that's only because of pressure from outside special interest groups. In reality, there are always plenty of people who need a job. Only the best workers can demand extra benefits, but they don't become the best workers by b!tching about their family situation.
The mediocre workers, on the other hand, they are easy to replace. In other words, your argument falls apart.

even the best workers can't demand extra benefits because they won't get the $ they're looking for because it's simply not there.

you'd be surprised how many people do "b!tch" about their families in the professional workplace. even when it's frowned upon.

therefore, my argument still stands

No, it's because most men are big p@ssies and still yearn for attention from their mothers. They let women define what a men should be, and as you know, a woman's definition of a man is one that is entirely centered around women, meaning pleasing women, protecting women, treating women, etc. If a boy is smothered with these kinds of definitions his whole life, how would he ever be able to stand up to a woman and tell her to get her job done, if she might accuse him of any of the following: you have a problem with women, you are sexist, you hate women, you have a small d!ck, etc, etc, etc?

When around a woman, most men are still little boys who need "validation" from mommy.

Intriguing argument. I can see that from some men. We appropriately call them "Momma's Boys." That's not my definition of a man. The one you used, in my opinion, is an outdated one. Maybe that's why it's hard for you to see my arguments because my generation has changed a lot of those roles and obligations. in my family, even when i was little, i had to do more than my brother -- including tasks that you'd probably argue are "men's work" (house repairs by chance?)

Wrong, it's just a result of women demanding equality but expecting special treatment. And what's interesting is that most all women (yourself included) cannot see the hypocrisy of such a situation.

The hypocrisy is that we're not equal. we never will be. we may be permitted to do what men can do (to a certain degree...) but we will always have to do both. As you yourself argued, you frowned upon the professional woman who opts not to have a family. She's essentially "equal" as a man (her pay won't reflect that, but putting that aside for now). However, she's frowned upon b/c she's not ALSO doing a woman's role.



And actually, the more you read the link I gave you, it actually does break it down. however, that wasn't even why i gave you the link. it was so you could see what kind of jobs women had.

[Mos]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

Do you question the government as to what they do with your taxes? Do they send you copies of receipts on what they spent your money on?

Did I just answer a question with a question?

Well there's a budget for that which every country outlines, so in a way it's like a receipt.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

where in the world do you get your facts from? take a look at this:

http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm

Some healthy math

Notice they use "median" and not averages.

actually, yes we question what the government does with our taxes. It gets pooled so they can't give receipts.. though you do get receipts if you donate and using those helps gets you tax breaks by the way

Then how come Americans have no clue that their military occupies over 130 countries? lol

[Mos]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

You study statistics. I'm not too far from math either. One of my majors was math. You should know best that statistics can be read in many ways. I'll give you an example

(Approximate numbers)
Last year there were 900 fatal accidents in KY. Around 15% were due to drunk driving. This means 85% of accidents were caused when the driver was sober. This can be read to mean it's safer to drive drunk.
Of course, this conclusion is only possible because one does not include the fact that most drunk drivers get into accidents, while most sober drivers dont. The percentages are such because the pool of sober drivers is much, much larger than that of drunk drivers.

Similarly, the statistics that indicate women make less than man are not calculated correctly. They are averages across the population, which means they don't make any adjustments based on occupations. It's like comparing a waitress to an male engineer then claiming that women are underpaid because the engineer makes 5 times more than the waitress.

Now, when statistics are calculating taking into account the occupation and job level, men and women make the same. The differences are statistically insignificant and can be explained.

Now, let me use the following example to illustrate that the whole concept of under-paying women is ridiculous.

Suppose you are in charge of a large organization. Most of your workers are men. You just learned that you can hire women and pay them 70 cents on the dollar.
This gives you the bright idea. If you replace all your male workers with females, then you'd save 30% on employee compensation costs. That will account to several
billion dollars of savings. But, why hasn't this happened (besides in industries that require little actual work, are stress free, and pay nothing to start with).

Hell, engineering firms go out of their way to recruit women, often under-qualified ones, and pay them more than men just so they can appear to be supporting the
female cause, as not doing so can be a pr disaster. Yet, after all the recruiting and fuss, most women just aren't interested in jobs that require actual work. They would
rather work in a low-stress job, then xxxxx about how they make so much less than men, all the while forgetting that the men that make more money work in demanding and
or dangerous fields.

I understand that, that's why the particular case that I studied regarded a particular sector which was a typical large company, what you are pointing at is a lurking variable and indeed when conducting a statistical inference you have to be careful of the influence of such lurking variables. The income disparity between women and men, has been decreasing and more recently has greatly decreased. For example,

Nearly half a century after it became illegal to pay women less on the basis of their sex, why do American women still earn less than men?
The answer depends on whom you ask — and so does the size of the gap. Some say 77% is overly grim. One reason: it doesn't account for individual differences between workers. Once you control for factors like education and experience, notes Francine Blau — who, along with fellow Cornell economist Lawrence Kahn, published a study on the 1998 wage gap — women's earnings rise to 81% of men's. Factor in occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and they jump to 91%. That's partly because women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields. The most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more.

So women's wages are not drastically off, but even with the factored in occupation/industry it's still not 100% of men's earnings.

I have always hated affirmative action both to people of colour and females, people should be based solely on their level of skill rather their demographic position.

Don't take it so personally. If you repeat feminist lies that have no backing I'll call you out on it. Also, let's stop asking for maturity. Life's a b!tch, so don't expect everyone to go along. If you prove your points everything will be fine.

I have not been repeating feminist lies, and I'm not a feminist. And when someone insults me, I'm not going to ignore it.

I did read what you said. You're saying there are times when women have to work, and I'm saying the company shouldn't care about these circumstances.

How do you infer what you say from my statement? I was referring to a previous statement made by someone else that was saying women should not work, and I was telling that there are circumstances where they have to work.

[levon]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

where in the world do you get your facts from? take a look at this:

http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm

Some healthy math

You should learn to read the post in it's entirety before responding. Your website shows accumulated statistics and does not break down numbers per occupation and job level. Aggregated numbers don't tell the whole story and can be interpreted to mean things that are in fact false.
I'm sure a working and studying woman such as yourself has taken at least one statistics class where the focus is on how to correctly interpret data.

.........(from the website you posted)

The median weekly earnings of women who were full-time wage and salary workers was $657, or 80 percent of men’s $819. When comparing the median weekly earnings of persons aged 16 to 24, young women earned 93 percent of what young men earned ($424 and $458, respectively).

That's accumulated averages. It effectively removes the fact that many more men that women work in dangerous professions, such as mining construction, etc. These men naturally get paid more than a woman who works a safe stress-free job in the office. However, once you just look at averages, it appears that women work full time, men work full time, but women ear less.

[levon]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

[B]

Yes, and in this society, families are still catered to. however, women are expected to be able to create the home and raise the children. while at the same time, many men are losing jobs.

You can thank feminism for that.

women need to step up more to the plate.

Did you know that back when families were actually catered to (more than 50 years ago), a man with a family would get priority over a young single man because he had a family to support. Nowadays, if anything, only women and some minorities are catered to, regardless of whether they have families or not. In fact, most professional women dont and probably never will have families.

i myself have to go to school full-time (18 units... 12 units is full-time minimum), i work 3 jobs, i care for my boyfriend, my parents, my grandparents, my cousins, my aunts... and a lot of other family members.I'm expected to do everything. I am a "bread winner" for my family. Thus, I satisfy the demands of the family, which includes having to work.

Congratulations, you're a model superwoman. This is what feminists wanted, so don't complain as you have everything a feminist would have wanted you to have. Be proud, you are now a slave to your job and have the same responsibilities as men have for ages. You shouldn't be complaining. After all, hasn't work freed you from having to be an oppressed housewife?

Actually, a work place does. The dangerous line is that if they don't, their workers will leave. If no workers, no job gets done - business fails.

Nop, only if you're a woman, and that's only because of pressure from outside special interest groups. In reality, there are always plenty of people who need a job. Only the best workers can demand extra benefits, but they don't become the best workers by b!tching about their family situation.
The mediocre workers, on the other hand, they are easy to replace. In other words, your argument falls apart.

In society, it's usually females given leniency because that's what's expected for her priority

No, it's because most men are big p@ssies and still yearn for attention from their mothers. They let women define what a men should be, and as you know, a woman's definition of a man is one that is entirely centered around women, meaning pleasing women, protecting women, treating women, etc. If a boy is smothered with these kinds of definitions his whole life, how would he ever be able to stand up to a woman and tell her to get her job done, if she might accuse him of any of the following: you have a problem with women, you are sexist, you hate women, you have a small d!ck, etc, etc, etc?

When around a woman, most men are still little boys who need "validation" from mommy.

-- and as poor KanadaHye is experiencing, because he's a man he's expected to fulfill his role: work more b/c the job needs to get done.

Wrong, it's just a result of women demanding equality but expecting special treatment. And what's interesting is that most all women (yourself included) cannot see the hypocrisy of such a situation.

[Tali]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

Yet, after all the recruiting and fuss, most women just aren't interested in jobs that require actual work. They would
rather work in a low-stress job, then xxxxx about how they make so much less than men, all the while forgetting that the men that make more money work in demanding and
or dangerous fields.

where in the world do you get your facts from? take a look at this:

http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm

Some healthy math

Do you question the government as to what they do with your taxes? Do they send you copies of receipts on what they spent your money on?

Did I just answer a question with a question?

actually, yes we question what the government does with our taxes. It gets pooled so they can't give receipts.. though you do get receipts if you donate and using those helps gets you tax breaks by the way

[KanadaHye]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

So why don't we question every statistically proven trend? Why do we even trust any statistic out there? That's a poor excuse to discredit it, you need more than that than to discredit the trend in wage disparity. simply saying numbers are easy to fix doesn't prove anything.

Do you question the government as to what they do with your taxes? Do they send you copies of receipts on what they spent your money on?

Did I just answer a question with a question?

[Mos]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

Sorry to say and it might be a shock, numbers are easy to "fix"

So why don't we question every statistically proven trend? Why do we even trust any statistic out there? That's a poor excuse to discredit it, you need more than that than to discredit the trend in wage disparity. simply saying numbers are easy to fix doesn't prove anything.

[levon]

Re: Who is the Armenian girl that our guys strive to marry.

What's with you seriously? I study statistics, I have analysed those trends first hand, there's a disparity in wages between men and women, doesn't have to do anything with liberal or conservative, it's a statistical fact.

You study statistics. I'm not too far from math either. One of my majors was math. You should know best that statistics can be read in many ways. I'll give you an example

(Approximate numbers)
Last year there were 900 fatal accidents in KY. Around 15% were due to drunk driving. This means 85% of accidents were caused when the driver was sober. This can be read to mean it's safer to drive drunk.
Of course, this conclusion is only possible because one does not include the fact that most drunk drivers get into accidents, while most sober drivers dont. The percentages are such because the pool of sober drivers is much, much larger than that of drunk drivers.

Similarly, the statistics that indicate women make less than man are not calculated correctly. They are averages across the population, which means they don't make any adjustments based on occupations. It's like comparing a waitress to an male engineer then claiming that women are underpaid because the engineer makes 5 times more than the waitress.

Now, when statistics are calculating taking into account the occupation and job level, men and women make the same. The differences are statistically insignificant and can be explained.

Now, let me use the following example to illustrate that the whole concept of under-paying women is ridiculous.

Suppose you are in charge of a large organization. Most of your workers are men. You just learned that you can hire women and pay them 70 cents on the dollar.
This gives you the bright idea. If you replace all your male workers with females, then you'd save 30% on employee compensation costs. That will account to several
billion dollars of savings. But, why hasn't this happened (besides in industries that require little actual work, are stress free, and pay nothing to start with).

Hell, engineering firms go out of their way to recruit women, often under-qualified ones, and pay them more than men just so they can appear to be supporting the
female cause, as not doing so can be a pr disaster. Yet, after all the recruiting and fuss, most women just aren't interested in jobs that require actual work. They would
rather work in a low-stress job, then xxxxx about how they make so much less than men, all the while forgetting that the men that make more money work in demanding and
or dangerous fields.

Feminnazi agent. What the hell is wrong with you Levon? Can you have one mature conversation? It tells a lot about a person's intellect when they are in every other sentence trying to defame the other person with such labels. Please grow up.

Don't take it so personally. If you repeat feminist lies that have no backing I'll call you out on it. Also, let's stop asking for maturity. Life's a b!tch, so don't expect everyone to go along. If you prove your points everything will be fine.

Okay, has nothing to do with what I said. Please read more carefully. All I was saying is that there are circumstances where women have to work even when they have a family. It's more ideal for the women to raise her kids, but there are times that it's not possible to do that and they have to work.

I did read what you said. You're saying there are times when women have to work, and I'm saying the company shouldn't care about these circumstances.