Inequality In Real Life? Watch

34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#61
Report 10 years ago
#61
(Original post by Jamin)
You're trying to say that because women argue for more equality, they ignore the inequalities that work the other way around?

Don't you think that equality should be achieved in all aspects of life?

Your attitude seems a bit defeatist. You obviously don't care that much about inequality and are just taking the way society works for granted, as "normal" whereas in many aspects everything is flawed.
Ok, I was being sarcastic, I thought that would be blatantly obvious. I think equality should be achieved, yes. Do I think any areas in which men are inequal will ever be ironed out? No. As it stands I think the levels of inequality in western society are almost acceptable and that each sides levels of inequalities are even, apart from maybe the fact men will get totally rinsed in divorce proceedings.
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#62
Report 10 years ago
#62
(Original post by Jamin)
Yes, surely women will need time to recover after childbirth but with the ****ty paternity leave their partner/husband will be working most of the time and so the mother is left to look after the child during this time, whereas it should really be something both do equally.

Surely.
Ah, I see. Sorry, I thought you were complaining that it was unfair because men don't get the same time as women, as thought it's some sort of free holiday that only women are entitled to. I see what you mean, and I agree that logically it would make sense for both parents to be around in this time. However, I don't really think it's an equality issue
0
reply
envious
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#63
Report 10 years ago
#63
(Original post by eDDeboo)
I agree that anyone doing the same job should have the same pay, but I also agree that it isn't wrong to promote a man over a woman if they're of equal skill or if she's just a bit better because she's more likely to take time off for maternity then come back and work less days etc.
The logic here is really bizarre. Despite accepting that women deserve equal pay to men for equal work, you are willing to deny the better qualified female candidate promotion just in case they have children and claim maternity pay or flexible working, Therefore it is extremely unlikely that women will get into the equivalent position of their male counterpart and thus the whole equal pay for equal work idea is really just rhetoric.

As I have said in a post in the previous thread the burden of child bearing should be shared by ALL in society not just women and this does include businesses and the government. Small businesses may not currently be sufficiently aided by the State to cope with maternity costs but this cannot be used as an argument against equality of pay for men and women. As a woman who may not even have children, I am extremely angry that I could potentially be discriminated against because I could POTENTIALLY have a child that will form part of the future labour force of this country and fuel our economy in the long term.

On a side point, I agree with whoever said that men should be given the same amount of paternity leave as women have for maternity leave. This will not only allow the father to bond with the child and enjoy this important time but will also remove the issue of child bearing from achieving equality.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#64
Report 10 years ago
#64
(Original post by Jelkin)
Some of your last points I don't agree with. If a musician chooses to donate a shedload of money to a specific charity/cause, or does tirelessly campaign for a cause enough that they get a knighthood for it, then that's their prerogative. Perhaps the musicians you mean had relatives who died of breast cancer. If there were someone who put in as much or more work towards prostate cancer, but wasn't recognised, I'd agree that that was unfair. Also, from your statistics it looks like whilst fewer women are affected by breast cancer, it actually kills more of them, which might explain why more money is spent on it (though the disparity does appear rather large, and I don't necessarily agree with that). I definitely think there should be more awareness about prostate cancer, and it's awful that there is so much more emphasis on breast cancer.

EDIT: Just re-read your last statistic - that is terrible.
Imagine the hullaballoo feminists would be making if this inequality was the other way around. Feminists can't be for equality for everyone if they aren't picking up cases like this to petition and campaign for, they're only for equality for women.
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#65
Report 10 years ago
#65
(Original post by Elipsis)
men will get totally rinsed in divorce proceedings.
I read an article a while ago that said that things are changing and soon divorce will be fairer for everyone.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#66
Report 10 years ago
#66
(Original post by envious)
As I have said in a post in the previous thread the burden of child bearing should be shared by ALL in society not just women and this does include businesses and the government. Small businesses may not currently be sufficiently aided by the State to cope with maternity costs but this cannot be used as an argument against equality of pay for men and women. As a woman who may not even have children, I am extremely angry that I could potentially be discriminated against because I could POTENTIALLY have a child that will form part of the future labour force of this country and fuel our economy in the long term.

On a side point, I agree with whoever said that men should be given the same amount of paternity leave as women have for maternity leave. This will not only allow the father to bond with the child and enjoy this important time but will also remove the issue of child bearing from achieving equality.
If 80% of women have children I think it's a fair presumption to make that a woman will more than likely need a good year or two off at some point down the line. You can't exactly have a go at a small business for not wanting to employ women because in doing so they are dodging an 80% bullet, why should they care about the future population of the country over their success now?
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#67
Report 10 years ago
#67
(Original post by envious)
The logic here is really bizarre. Despite accepting that women deserve equal pay to men for equal work, you are willing to deny the better qualified female candidate promotion just in case they have children and claim maternity pay or flexible working, Therefore it is extremely unlikely that women will get into the equivalent position of their male counterpart and thus the whole equal pay for equal work idea is really just rhetoric.

As I have said in a post in the previous thread the burden of child bearing should be shared by ALL in society not just women and this does include businesses and the government. Small businesses may not currently be sufficiently aided by the State to cope with maternity costs but this cannot be used as an argument against equality of pay for men and women. As a woman who may not even have children, I am extremely angry that I could potentially be discriminated against because I could POTENTIALLY have a child that will form part of the future labour force of this country and fuel our economy in the long term.

On a side point, I agree with whoever said that men should be given the same amount of paternity leave as women have for maternity leave. This will not only allow the father to bond with the child and enjoy this important time but will also remove the issue of child bearing from achieving equality.
If I knew how to do that applause emoticon, I would. Absolutely.

(Original post by Elipsis)
Imagine the hullaballoo feminists would be making if this inequality was the other way around. Feminists can't be for equality for everyone if they aren't picking up cases like this to petition and campaign for, they're only for equality for women.
Sorry, but who ARE these mystery feminists you keep mentioning who hate men and think women should get the best of everything??? I see myself as a feminist but I think the idea that women's illnesses are better funded than men's is terrible. In the end, however, women will primarily campaign for things for women, and men will primarily campaign for things for men. It's not because feminists think men don't matter.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#68
Report 10 years ago
#68
(Original post by Jelkin)
Sorry, but who ARE these mystery feminists you keep mentioning who hate men and think women should get the best of everything??? I see myself as a feminist but I think the idea that women's illnesses are better funded than men's is terrible. In the end, however, women will primarily campaign for things for women, and men will primarily campaign for things for men. It's not because feminists think men don't matter.
Why say you're for equality then? You're really for equality when it suits you, damn everybody else as long as you get your equality.
0
reply
envious
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#69
Report 10 years ago
#69
(Original post by Elipsis)
If 80% of women have children I think it's a fair presumption to make that a woman will more than likely need a good year or two off at some point down the line. You can't exactly have a go at a small business for not wanting to employ women because in doing so they are dodging an 80% bullet, why should they care about the future population of the country over their success now?
I'm not having a go at small businesses as obviously I recognise that many of these firms operate with very small profit margins and thus the cost of maternity pay can cause huge problems for them. However in these cases I think that the Government should step in and subsidise this cost more than they currently do making the "80% bullet" a less devastating one. Also whilst statistically you may be right that MOST women will want children at some point, for those that don't it is impossible for them to prove that they do not intend to have kids and thus the (rubbish) argument that women choose to have children and therefore to a certain extent deserve to be paid less cannot be applied to these females who will still suffer discrimination.
0
reply
ConservativeNucleophile
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#70
Report 10 years ago
#70
(Original post by Jelkin)
(Original post by ConservativeNucleophile)
I find it oh-so-hilarious how the majority of feminists or equality freaks will not argue for equality maternity and paternity rights.
Example?
(Original post by Jelkin)
Sorry, but who ARE these mystery feminists you keep mentioning who hate men and think women should get the best of everything??? I see myself as a feminist but I think the idea that women's illnesses are better funded than men's is terrible. In the end, however, women will primarily campaign for things for women, and men will primarily campaign for things for men. It's not because feminists think men don't matter.
Straight from the proverbial horse's mouth there. Ellipsis is right:

(Original post by Ellipsis)
Why say you're for equality then? You're really for equality when it suits you, damn everybody else as long as you get your equality.
0
reply
WithFlyingColours
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#71
Report 10 years ago
#71
The mistake feminism makes is to think that men and women are equal. They're not. Feminists want women to take men's roles. That's not how it's meant to be, men and women are complementary. Feminism by its very nature is about turning the tables so that women are more powerful than men. They have absolutely no interest in things being fair.
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#72
Report 10 years ago
#72
(Original post by ConservativeNucleophile)
Straight from the proverbial horse's mouth there.
No, it's not. I care about ALL inequality, it's just that I'm more likely to take action about issues that affect me. It's like saying I'm racist because I don't campaign about race issues. I'm still all for equality - saying I want equality only when it suits me would indicate that I agree with things like men paying for everything in a relationship, when I don't.
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#73
Report 10 years ago
#73
(Original post by Elipsis)
Why say you're for equality then? You're really for equality when it suits you, damn everybody else as long as you get your equality.
That's rubbish. I agree with equality for all, but I'm more likely to do something about things that directly affect me. After all, you keep going on about the discrimination against men, but I don't see you talking about discrimination against women as much - not because you don't believe women shouldn't be discriminated against, but because it affects you much less. It's natural. It doesn't mean I'm only for equality when it suits me. I believe equality means equal rights and opportunities in all departments, including divorce, custody, and the other things you've been talking about in which men get more of a raw deal.
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#74
Report 10 years ago
#74
(Original post by WithFlyingColours)
The mistake feminism makes is to think that men and women are equal. They're not. Feminists want women to take men's roles. That's not how it's meant to be, men and women are complementary. Feminism by its very nature is about turning the tables so that women are more powerful than men. They have absolutely no interest in things being fair.
What feminists? Who are you talking about exactly?
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#75
Report 10 years ago
#75
Feminism is not a bad thing.

There are a lot of things that aren't fair in society, but they are there for the good of everyone. On the surface it may not seem completely fair that women are paid the same and hired as often as men because of the maternity issue. But how can making sure women are not disadvantaged by this fact be a bad thing?

I support helping minorities and women to earn on average as much as white males. I don't see how this can be a bad thing.
0
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#76
Report 10 years ago
#76
(Original post by WithFlyingColours)
The mistake feminism makes is to think that men and women are equal. They're not. Feminists want women to take men's roles. That's not how it's meant to be, men and women are complementary. Feminism by its very nature is about turning the tables so that women are more powerful than men. They have absolutely no interest in things being fair.
Women and men are equal. Your 'role' in society should never be determined by your sex. Until you realise this, you are a misogynist.
0
reply
manderlay in flames
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#77
Report 10 years ago
#77
(Original post by affinity89)
Having read through, and attempted to reason with, the many posts on the 'Should Women Earn As Much As Men?' thread, I am personally shocked by the ideas expressed.

There seems to be some very unliberal views - that women do not work as hard, that women don't deserve to earn like for like in like for like jobs because they have children, that women are a risk for businesses etc.

I am not starting the thread again or anything - far from it.

It seems that everytime a female states everyone should have equality they are shot down as a 'feminist'. Surely seeking equality is a sensible and humane desire as we are equal - no one is better than anyone else, regardless of their age, gender or ethnic background.

So, I am curious to know if you have encountered such bias in real life - from friends, family, employers etc. And, if you have, how you have overcome it.
I think you have a fundamentall misconception. Having equality is not the same as being statistically equivalent in all areas, because due to differences between the sexes (and even if these weren't biological, there would be sufficient cultural) there's always going to be statitical differences in earnings etc. If we pay women the same as men but with 9 months of doing nothing sometimes, or lower physical strength/IQ they aren't equal, they're priveliged
0
reply
manderlay in flames
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#78
Report 10 years ago
#78
(Original post by Jelkin)
In the end, however, women will primarily campaign for things for women, and men will primarily campaign for things for men. It's not because feminists think men don't matter.
No, because of the role of the feminist movement as a social gathering and "cause" which women are encouraged to buy into, women are often campaigning for things for women, with very limited or smaller male counterpart organisations, which may help to explain the bias towards women in the current legal system.
0
reply
eulerwaswrong
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#79
Report 10 years ago
#79
(Original post by affinity89)
Having read through, and attempted to reason with, the many posts on the 'Should Women Earn As Much As Men?' thread, I am personally shocked by the ideas expressed.

There seems to be some very unliberal views - that women do not work as hard, that women don't deserve to earn like for like in like for like jobs because they have children, that women are a risk for businesses etc.

I am not starting the thread again or anything - far from it.

It seems that everytime a female states everyone should have equality they are shot down as a 'feminist'. Surely seeking equality is a sensible and humane desire as we are equal - no one is better than anyone else, regardless of their age, gender or ethnic background.

So, I am curious to know if you have encountered such bias in real life - from friends, family, employers etc. And, if you have, how you have overcome it.
i cant really say ive experienced much bias as yet - but thats not to say it isnt out there - you are so right there is so much inequality out there it just isnt fair - something needs to be done quickly

for example - often in proffessions men need to wear shirt and tie but women can wear what the want - for example teaching - how often do you see a female teacher wearing a tie for example - generally women arent that proffesional.

in public sector pay is equal, however in private sector pay is based on quality of work/work done etc - therefore men generally get paid more as they do more work

women take more days off sick than men - yet women get same pay - how unfair is this.

Wimbledon is a good example - WHY THE **** SHOULD WOMEN GET PAID THE SAME FOR DOING LESS WORK AND OF LOWER QUALITY - WIMBLEDON IS SO SEXIST!!!!! argghhh - it infuriates me. fact is women leagues in sports etc were set up so women could have a chance to compete as they werent good enough to compete in male events - if the argument is they play the same quality - why not make them play 5 sets - or even have a joint tournament - then we will see how good women are - they would be asking for a womens league straight away. Wimbledon is so sexist it is a joke

Often for university courses such as engineering/physics/maths there are often univeristy funded bursaries for women as they are classed as "under represented groups" - how sexist is that - this argument is flawed as there are none available for men in nursing etc

bottom line - society is so sexist against men - it really does infuriate me - why should women be treated better than men just because they have different genitalia
0
reply
WithFlyingColours
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#80
Report 10 years ago
#80
Until you realise this, you are a misogynist.
Yeah, that must be right. No logic, get a grip.

So our roles aren't determined by our sex? Just going to undo millions of years of evolution by your silly little movement are you? I think not.

Why has history been written as it is? Why have women historically been in the home?

Women and men have different genetic make up. Women can give birth, which is vital to human existence. Men are hard wired to provide for their family.

You need to sort it out, you really do.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (546)
37.73%
No - but I will (113)
7.81%
No - I don't want to (100)
6.91%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (688)
47.55%

Watched Threads

View All