The Student Room Group

Do feminists only want 50/50 in the cushy, well paid jobs?

I always see them complain about the lack of female CEO's, politicians, engineers, surgeons etc but never about any of these jobs where men are represented close the 100% : asbestos removal , sewage work, oil rig work, deep sea fishing , line and power workers, roofers, welders, miners or rubbish collecting. If you believe the theory that socialization and patriarchy are to blame for the lack of women in top jobs then the lack of females in all these other jobs is also due to sexism and stereotyping. So why not campaign for all jobs to be 50/50, not just the cushy and/or high flying ones?

I see this pattern in all feminist thinking. They never complain about women being a tiny % of homeless people, people in prison, death and injuries in the work place, suicide and mental health issues while getting a much bigger chunk out of the welfare system, public health care, gov programs or charities, women being treated like quasi-children by criminal and divorce courts, getting close to being almost 2/3 of uni students. Seems like they want equality only when it comes to the good bits. Do they want a world where CEO's and MP's are 50/50 but basically all the homeless, prisoners and sewage workers will still be men?

A couple of issue I was reading about lately : how gov cuts mainly affect women and how a woman's refuge was closing down. Feminists were complaining without even caring or realizing that 1. the vast maj of new gov jobs were taken by women (so the first people to go when cuts happen) and 2. there are 4000 women's refuges and barely 20 for men and still they complain enough money isn't pumped into women's issues.

Visual interpretation of the post :

(edited 9 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
No replies? Not surprised. Much like feminists' reaction to ISIS : OMG have you seen how they treat women, they want them to cover their bodies and not sleep around!!!! Meanwhile ISIS has executed thousands and thousands of men by throwing them off buildings, stoning, headshots, burning them alive...but OMG did you see they want women to wear certain outfits!!!!
Feminists aren't subject to group think :smile:. The feminists who receive the most attention tend to be the more controversial ones. The reason the media publishes pieces by feminists of this kind is that outrage sells. A lot of it is clickbait, though, of course, these women are as entitled to their views as everyone else.

However, it can cause a distorted view of what feminism is about, which is simply about equality of opportunity and equality under the law for both men and women. I hesitate to call myself a feminist these days, because of the general bad impression, but my view is: when it comes to employment, it's all about who is the best person for the job, whether this is a man or a woman, and regardless of race, disability and so on. I do care about issues like suicide rates amongst men, mental health problems, domestic abuse, homelessness and prison statistics. Just because I care about FGM, for example, that does not mean that I don't think that circumcision should not be inflicted on male infants (apart from in cases of medical necessity). Just because I believe the rape of women is an issue of serious concern, does not mean that I don't believe that there is an inequality under the law, as men can be raped by women and this should be recognised.

There is no sense in creating a man vs woman narrative, on either side. There shouldn't be sides. If we all worked together to solve all those problems, everyone would be happier and have a better quality of life.


''To achieve perfect gender pay equity, there would have to be an increase in the number of women in higher-paying, but higher-risk occupations like fire-fighting, construction, and coal mining. That outcome will certainly reduce the gender pay gap, but it will come at a huge cost: sentencing thousands of women per year to fatal occupational deaths. Would closing the pay gap, if it also means closing the gender occupational death gap and exposing thousands of women to work-related deaths each year.''


@aei.org
Reply 4
Well paid jobs?
Honestly, it would be hilarious to see women working on oil platforms.
Original post by SiminaM
Well paid jobs?
Honestly, it would be hilarious to see women working on oil platforms.


Why?
Reply 6
Damn, I make a 2 letter grammar correction in the OP and the thread is pulled for like 9 hours for ''further review''. Beria's got nothing on TSR's finest . :rolleyes:
I think they need to ban the creation of two separate rates of pay for men and women at work.
Original post by Snagprophet
I think they need to ban the creation of two separate rates of pay for men and women at work.


This has been banned for decades...
Reply 9
Pretty much, the day I see feminists campaigning for more women to be binmen (for example) or for more men to be beauticians (because they're all about equality...right?) is the day I'll eat my hat.
Original post by SerenityNow
No replies? Not surprised. Much like feminists' reaction to ISIS : OMG have you seen how they treat women, they want them to cover their bodies and not sleep around!!!! Meanwhile ISIS has executed thousands and thousands of men by throwing them off buildings, stoning, headshots, burning them alive...but OMG did you see they want women to wear certain outfits!!!!

I'm not disagreeing with your overall analysis of feminist equality of outcome ideologies but ISIS are taking women and young girls as young as 5 as sex slaves. ISIS are clearly an example of extreme misogyny.
Original post by Helloworld_95
This has been banned for decades...


I was joking because people literally think men and women are paid differently at the same place.
You mentioned welding and oil rig work, one of which is pretty diverse and can be well paid and the other is serious, serious money.

To be honest I actually work in the former industry and have worked in a couple of others that you would not consider cushy, and I would NOT like to be the first woman to work in our factory. It is both harder for women to break into, and less important for overall equality, so that's probably why feminists aren't always vocal about it. But I am pretty sure they would want women to be able to make 6 figures in 6 months work on an oil rig :dontknow:


Original post by SiminaM
Well paid jobs?
Honestly, it would be hilarious to see women working on oil platforms.

Why? If you can weld pressure vessels in all positions while away from home for 6 months your hourly wage is gonna make you too valuable to be doing that much physical labour. Hell I am in an entry level job and the managers get annoyed when they see me carrying steel around that other people should be taking care of. It takes the same kind of physical dexterity as knitting, sewing, drawing and writing neatly. Why would women automatically be bad at it?
Original post by The_Mighty_Bush
I'm not disagreeing with your overall analysis of feminist equality of outcome ideologies but ISIS are taking women and young girls as young as 5 as sex slaves. ISIS are clearly an example of extreme misogyny.


Do you watch the news ? Yes, they are awful to everyone but they treat men much, much worse. Every single day some guy is executed for just about any reason you could come up with. These days I'm scared to open the news because who the **** knows what kind of horrible method of execution they've come up with. And it's virtually always a man who is the victim. Boys and men are killed, raped, tortured, brainwashed, kidnapped, have their hands cut off and **** knows what else every single day in 3rd world's war zones. But do Angelina or Mrs. Obama care? Does the western public care? The media ? CNN? BBC?Ofc not, they barely make the news. It's all about the girls, boys and men do not mean **** all. Remember the hostage taking in Paris last month? Every single media channel reported ''men and women among the hostages'' and the french negotiator expert on CNN was talking about how they will try to get him to release the women and children....because ,you see, men are little more than farm animals, cannon fodder since times immemorial . Just like 100 years ago : billionaire men died on the Titanic so working class women could get on the boats.

Feminists find the tiniest thing that bothers them while ignoring the fact that men have it much worse in the same exact area . Take , for ex, retirement : men retire 5 years later and die 5 years younger. That means the average woman benefits from 10 years of extra pension and lifespan, not to mention huge health care costs mostly paid through men's taxes . What bothers feminists? That women are on a fixed limited income in old age! They are getting back waaaay more from the system than they ever paid in while living longer bu nooooooo it's still the women who are the oppressed victims! JFC!!!!
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 14
I think the OP rather misses the point. I don't think feminists who seek managerial workplace equality while not risky job equality has to be hypocritical. The obvious example is Government. Women, like minorities, are underrepresented in Government which should be addressed. The same stands for public services such as the NHS, women should have fair representation at board room level.

Women, like men, can chose the industry they want to work in. Looking having an 50/50 gender split in binmen refuse disposal operatives and dinnerladies food service officers isn't what most people want. It's about giving women proportional representation in the industries in which they work.
Original post by SerenityNow
Do you watch the news ? Yes, they are awful to everyone but they treat men much, much worse. Every single day some guy is executed for just about any reason you could come up with. These days I'm scared to open the news because who the **** knows what kind of horrible method of execution they've come up with. And it's virtually always a man who is the victim. Boys and men are killed, raped, tortured, brainwashed, kidnapped, have their hands cut off and **** knows what else every single day in 3rd world's war zones. But do Angelina or Mrs. Obama care? Does the western public care? The media ? CNN? BBC?Ofc not, they barely make the news. It's all about the girls, boys and men do not mean **** all. Remember the hostage taking in Paris last month? Every single media channel reported ''men and women among the hostages'' and the french negotiator expert on CNN was talking about how they will try to get him to release the women and children....because ,you see, men are little more than farm animals, cannon fodder since times immemorial . Just like 100 years ago : billionaire men died on the Titanic so working class women could get on the boats.

Feminists find the tiniest thing that bothers them while ignoring the fact that men have it much worse in the same exact area . Take , for ex, retirement : men retire 5 years later and die 5 years younger. That means the average woman benefits from 10 years of extra pension and lifespan, not to mention huge health care costs mostly paid through men's taxes . What bothers feminists? That women are on a fixed limited income in old age! They are getting back waaaay more from the system than they ever paid in while living longer bu nooooooo it's still the women who are the oppressed victims! JFC!!!!

I agree with you on the general point that feminism has become an authoritarian force and the discrimination to achieve equality of outcome in employment is wrong, however I think you have become too focused on this women/men issue even when it isn't really about that at all.

ISIS are cruel and evil to all but they certainly do represent extreme misogynistic attitudes that we should be fighting against. It isn't the only reason to be against ISIS but it is one of the reasons.
Original post by pjm600
The obvious example is Government. Women, like minorities, are underrepresented in Government which should be addressed. The same stands for public services such as the NHS, women should have fair representation at board room level.

Why? I see no reason why we should care about the gender of our MPs.

Original post by pjm600
It's about giving women proportional representation in the industries in which they work.

Why not the same for men? In primary school's for instance.
Reply 17
Original post by Helloworld_95
This has been banned for decades...


So has meth
You know what people still do?
Meth.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen
''If it's difficult or dangerous, it's 95% a man doing it''

Politician, CEO, journalist is all good for equality. Mathematician, rocket scientist and sewer worker? Women are not so interested in that, can't be handed to you I guess.
Original post by The_Mighty_Bush
Why? I see no reason why we should care about the gender of our MPs.


Why not the same for men? In primary school's for instance.


For the longest time, men wanting to do a Primary school PGCE got an bursary and fee waiver.
(edited 9 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest