Why is gender equality still not a reality in 2016?

It's been proven true, look at men's world records to women's world records at the olympics, look at the Williamson sisters v Kirsten braasch.

You are giving up because some people actually look at the data and realise that it shows a difference, why do you not look at the data and realise that the difference exists?

You asked me about a physical sport, it's guaranteed that the top male players/teams will beat top female players/teams in physical sports.
If you define better by who will win in a match between the 2, then Andy Murray is better because we will win against Serena in a match. Are you disputing this?

It's been proven true, look at men's world records to women's world records at the olympics, look at the Williamson sisters v Kirsten braasch.

You are giving up because some people actually look at the data and realise that it shows a difference, why do you not look at the data and realise that the difference exists?

I've really got to go now but seriously I'm not suggesting that men aren't physically stronger or faster. I'm not saying that men's records in sport aren't better. I'm not saying that there aren't genetic differences which cause men to have an advantage in sport. I'm saying that both male and female athletes train equally hard and have equal amounts of actual skill. That is not to do with gender.

I can't pretend to be a football fan but I really don't see any reason why female footballers have to be less skillful than male footballers. Yes, men are genetically more likely to be stronger and faster but women will need just as much actual skill when playing. Many girls and women do enjoy football but yes obviously more boys and men take an interest in it but this is again to do with children being brought up expected to follow traditional gender roles. Boys get encouraged to like football from a young age whereas girls get encouraged to like dolls, fashion etc. If young girls were given more opportunities to do football then more of them would grow up interested in it which would create more future female football players and female football fans. The girls were never given the opportunity to do football in sports lessons at my school although quite a few of us played it at break and liked it. The boys on the other hand did it at every week. You've picked the very specific example of football which had a very big gender imbalance due to many different factors. Is Serena Williams much worse at tennis than Andy Murray just because she's a woman? Looking at the many other careers outside sport, do you think that women are just worse than men at business, politics, law, science, banking etc.?

I'm not suggesting women should be forced to do science careers or subjects. I'm saying that women should be given equal opportunities to succeed at careers in science and industry if they do go into them. Women do go into these careers but they often don't have the same opportunities when competing to get the best jobs and also when trying to get promoted to higher level jobs once they do work for a company. It's a catch-22 situation as well because for example my mum works in a STEM field and although she's been successful she's faced loads of sexism and discrimination and has had to work much harder than the men she's worked with in order to succeed. Consequently, she said to me "By all means do Biochemistry at university but don't work in industry after you graduate. Do post graduate medicine or law or something so that you can work in an area with better gender equality". It is also true that girls are often not encouraged to take an interest in science in the same way that boys are. This works both ways for example I had a male friend who was forced by his parents to take science GCSEs and A Levels when he was much more interested in English etc.

What you've said about Cambridge admissions statistics isn't true. For 2014 entry, which is the most recent year that the statistics have been published for as far as I can see, 59.2% of the applicants for Natural Sciences were male and 40.8% were female. 60.3% of the students that were accepted were male and 39.7% were female. These percentages are very close to being equivalent and a similar pattern follows for all of the STEM courses. http://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/files/publications/undergrad_admissions_statistics_2014_cycle.pdf Page 14.

Women take more sick days on average than men. Should a company be able to just hire men and discriminate against women because of that? Lets take another example, men are more likely to be peadophiles therefore were Andrea Leadsom's comments that men should not be hired to do childcare okay?

No, I haven't studied Economics but I have studied Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Maths etc. and I've read widely about this and looked up studies and research. Studying AS Level Economics doesn't make you an expert. It's not a myth; have you actually understood or considered anything I said?

I've really got to go now but seriously I'm not suggesting that men aren't physically stronger or faster. I'm not saying that men's records in sport aren't better. I'm not saying that there aren't genetic differences which cause men to have an advantage in sport. I'm saying that both male and female athletes train equally hard and have equal amounts of actual skill. That is not to do with gender.

@Ano9901whichone @joecphillips

Now this is just getting ridiculous! ISIS are terrorists. Far right neo-nazi extremists are terrorists. Feminism is in no way associated with any kind of terrorism. Saying that is actually very inappropriate just now with all the actual terrorist attacks that have happened recently.

For someone with a supposedly open mind on this I would say your mind is pretty set. If you're trolling then please go and do something useful with your time instead.

This would be helped if there wasn't discrimination against women particularly to do with having children. In a study, approximately 40% of managers admitted they are less inclined to hire young women who may have children or women who already have children even though this is actually illegal discrimination. This is why women are so often asked about relationships/marriage and children in job interviews. Women are also often not treated fairly if they do work at a company and then go on maternity leave. In UK society, women are generally expected to have children and if they don't they are often told they are "unnatural" or always asked why they don't. If women do have children then they are almost always expected to do the majority of the childcare and housework even when working full-time or to take part-time jobs in order to do that or even not work at all. If they don't they are often told they are bad mothers. This all prevents women from getting to top level jobs and focusing on their careers in the same way that men can. In my opinion, there should be more and better paid paternity leave so that the responsibility for a new baby can be shared between a couple. The man and the woman should do equal amounts of childcare and housework as the child grows up unless one or other of them wants to do more of course. If a women wants to do the majority of the childcare/work part-time/be a stay at home mother then that's fine; it's about having the choice rather than being expected to do it.

Which is already the case, the leave is shared between the parents if a set of perfectly reasonable criteria are met

Posted from TSR Mobile

**not in most cities in america or in most other countries on the planet. most men are Still getting shegged in the divorce courts and being forced to pay enormous sums of money and are prevented from ever seeing their children.

for prime examples, check out 'the fathers' rights movement' on facebook

**not in most cities in america or in most other countries on the planet. most men are Still getting shegged in the divorce courts and being forced to pay enormous sums of money and are prevented from ever seeing their children.

for prime examples, check out 'the fathers' rights movement' on facebook

I'm not going to read after you said "children being brought up expected to follow traditional gender roles. Boys get encouraged to like football from a young age whereas girls get encouraged to like dolls, fashion etc. "

I cannot believe you think this is true. I have never been forced to have an interest, you're telling me my interests are ingrained into me? How pathetic, if I was forced to play football I would've stopped ages ago but no I drive myself (plus have a job purely to fund this) spending two days a week playing football and a few other days working. But I guess I was forced and I actually hate football right? So pathetic, actually annoys me you think there are encouraged gender roles how pathetic.

I'm going to preface this by saying that clearly claiming feminist groups are as bad as the likes of Daesh is ridiculous, however a fair terrorist case could be made.

The oxford definition of terrorism is "The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims".

Exhibit A: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0

Exhibit B: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80

I'd sure as hell feel intimidated if I was greeted like that every time I wanted to talk about mens issues.

And society expects men to go and earn the money for the family and are seen as weak and uninteresting if they want to stay at home and raise their children. There is less in the way of paternity leave to enable this meaning that even if a man is willing to tolerate the stereotype, he remains less able to be a major part of his child's upbringing. This is obviously a problem all round, but I wouldn't say it was a point of inequality, just a point of idiocy.

What's wrong with escorts, you should support them as a Feminist. Also I have something you could agree with, as a fascisti, Mass free childcare, Ie nursery type things provided by the state. Also, free holidays, free activity groups, fitness and health of the nation ect.

I stopped revising, naa dw, I get enough of that off my parents but tbh, as wrong as it sounds I don't really care lol. My dads an alcoholic and so was his dad etc...
But women, are maternal, they have more bond with the baby etc and know what to do(and usually want to spend time with their baby etc)
Men aren't as sensitive etc, and tbh I'd have no idea how to look after a baby, it took my father a few goes lmao. It all depends if most want to, you earn less money and the mother would usually prefer it in my opinion. I'd say men do quite a bit of housework in my experience, I mean my great grandfather did nothing and he had 12 children...lol. But all the men in my family that have children do(those that don't have no gf/wife so they do it all obvs), my dad even looks after my baby brother and little brother(I don't live with them) however, that's mainly due to him not being at work or if his gf is at work. I wouldn't have a problem doing housework/cleaning or cooking, actually I'd just higher a cleaner LMAO. Cooking is bad, when you can just drink beer which is far easier lmao,unless someone depended upon me. But another point, feminism leads to less time cooking, so kids get *****er meals for example as parents don't have time.
But for business's there's no incentive, men and women are just as good at doing a job, that's why they pick the man usually. Unless it's a really valued employer/friend.