|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 7, 2018 1:03:19 GMT
That's a lot of defensive words. MY points were THEIR points direct from FOUR websites. Fact. I took my stats, info AND WIDER interpretation from government websites which are also used as authorities by government to make decisions on issues which affect the community. If YOU know better, prove it. It is that simple. Defensive words? Huh? What makes you think FOUR websites is a big deal? You may have bolded it, but you didn't address it. What makes you think government websites contain sacrosanct information, and that by just claiming they are government websites means it adds to the strength of your point? Poor reasoning is rife in the Australian government, and all governments. Here is an Australian MP doing exactly what Goz is doing, only she is in Parliament and is the Shadow Deputy Leader, Minister for education and Women.....Jesus.....This women could be in charge of education and she thinks THIS is an argument.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 7, 2018 1:20:43 GMT
That's a lot of defensive words. MY points were THEIR points direct from FOUR websites. Fact. I took my stats, info AND WIDER interpretation from government websites which are also used as authorities by government to make decisions on issues which affect the community. If YOU know better, prove it. It is that simple. Defensive words? Huh? What makes you think FOUR websites is a big deal? You may have bolded it, but you didn't address it. What makes you think government websites contain sacrosanct information, and that by just claiming they are government websites means it adds to the strength of your point? Poor reasoning is rife in the Australian government, and all governments. Are you an anarchist? Why have them and pay them with tax payers' money if they are not correct. I repeat. Go tell them where they are wrong or shut up! You know that these agencies are non-partisan, right? It is 'cute' that YOU know better. Delusional butt 'cute.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 7, 2018 1:30:30 GMT
Defensive words? Huh? What makes you think FOUR websites is a big deal? You may have bolded it, but you didn't address it. What makes you think government websites contain sacrosanct information, and that by just claiming they are government websites means it adds to the strength of your point? Poor reasoning is rife in the Australian government, and all governments. Here is an Australian MP doing exactly what Goz is doing, only she is in Parliament and is the Shadow Deputy Leader, Minister for education and Women.....Jesus.....This women could be in charge of education and she thinks THIS is an argument.
EXACTLY! Good point Thanks for pointing this out. Can you tell me WHY a man( or woman though most of the people in this particular industry are male because reasons, mainly historic and gender based) making 'metal' ( with a 'certificate obtainable in 1 year) should earn THAT much more than a person ( male or female though mainly female) than a person educating the next generation of Australians? who have to have a four year degree? Who and why do they decide this, if it is NOT rampant sexism?
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 7, 2018 1:35:57 GMT
Defensive words? Huh? What makes you think FOUR websites is a big deal? You may have bolded it, but you didn't address it. What makes you think government websites contain sacrosanct information, and that by just claiming they are government websites means it adds to the strength of your point? Poor reasoning is rife in the Australian government, and all governments. Are you an anarchist? Why have them and pay them with tax payers' money if they are not correct. I repeat. Go tell them where they are wrong or shut up! You know that these agencies are non-partisan, right? It is 'cute' that YOU know better. Delusional butt 'cute. Nope, not an Anarchist. Why have/pay them? Because there isn't a better option for trying to govern millions of people with rather disparate views. I don't care how often you repeat it, I don't have to take up the point with them, I can take it up with you, the person making the points on the discussion board. For example: if someone tries to tell me that a particular medical treatment in my field works well based on them reading a particular study, and I point out i've read the study and can explain the flaws in the methodology (and therefore their discussion/conclusion), meaning the evidence isnt very strong, that person saying "well take it up with the authors of the study, not me" is ridiculous. Im having the conversation with them about their belief, and the evidence they think supports it. I have no obligation to first make the authors of the study see the errors of their ways, and then have that filter down to the person i'm talking to. Is climate change no longer a problem if the current government decides to pull out of the Paris accord, and return to coal based energy? Because the government cant be wrong, correct? Thats why only one party ever gets elected, correct? Because they are always right? I do know better. Its not hard to see that, if you have ever done some balanced reading around the topic. Which you have not.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 7, 2018 1:38:38 GMT
Here is an Australian MP doing exactly what Goz is doing, only she is in Parliament and is the Shadow Deputy Leader, Minister for education and Women.....Jesus.....This women could be in charge of education and she thinks THIS is an argument.
EXACTLY! Good point Thanks for pointing this out. Can you tell me WHY a man( or woman though most of the people in this particular industry are male because reasons, mainly historic and gender based) making 'metal' ( with a 'certificate obtainable in 1 year) should earn THAT much more than a person ( male or female though mainly female) than a person educating the next generation of Australians? who have to have a four year degree? Who and why do they decide this, if it is NOT rampant sexism? Women are free to enter either qualification. They choose not to enter the ones that make more money. A big reason that on average, they earn less than men. She did not make a good point.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 7, 2018 2:00:40 GMT
EXACTLY! Good point Thanks for pointing this out. Can you tell me WHY a man( or woman though most of the people in this particular industry are male because reasons, mainly historic and gender based) making 'metal' ( with a 'certificate obtainable in 1 year) should earn THAT much more than a person ( male or female though mainly female) than a person educating the next generation of Australians? who have to have a four year degree? Who and why do they decide this, if it is NOT rampant sexism? Women are free to enter either qualification. They choose not to enter the ones that make more money. A big reason that on average, they earn less than men. She did not make a good point. Holy crap! COULD you be any more stupid? The point is WHY are metal workers ( of any stripe) paid more than child care worker who are better educated and doing a more important job.... IF it is not sexism.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 7, 2018 8:55:12 GMT
Women are free to enter either qualification. They choose not to enter the ones that make more money. A big reason that on average, they earn less than men. She did not make a good point. Holy crap! COULD you be any more stupid? The point is WHY are metal workers ( of any stripe) paid more than child care worker who are better educated and doing a more important job.... IF it is not sexism. Everybody knows engineering jobs make more money than education jobs, because their industry is more profitable. It makes more money. Do you know why male American basketball players in the NBA make more than the females in the WNBA? Surely even you would admit that is fair. Also, you are confusing the qualifications. The comparison is NOT to a 4 year degree. Cert III metal fabrication TAFE courses are longer than the cert III early childhood courses. Once again, women know this going in. Personally, I chose a lower paying medical profession for the flexibility, and the rewards of helping people over more profitable sectors. I don't complain about it though. If money was my main concern, I would have chosen a higher paying profession, with the added stress levels, and the decrease in personal satisfaction from doing good all day. No one is forcing women in roles that are known to make less money. Also, as far as I can tell the median wages are actually almost identical. www.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Sheet_Metal_Worker/Hourly_Ratewww.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Early_Childhood_Educator_(ECE)/Hourly_Rate
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 7, 2018 17:29:56 GMT
Here is an Australian MP doing exactly what Goz is doing, only she is in Parliament and is the Shadow Deputy Leader, Minister for education and Women.....Jesus.....This women could be in charge of education and she thinks THIS is an argument.
EXACTLY! Good point Thanks for pointing this out. Can you tell me WHY a man( or woman though most of the people in this particular industry are male because reasons, mainly historic and gender based) making 'metal' ( with a 'certificate obtainable in 1 year) should earn THAT much more than a person ( male or female though mainly female) than a person educating the next generation of Australians? who have to have a four year degree? Who and why do they decide this, if it is NOT rampant sexism? Because one industry is more profitable than the other. That is why employees in that sector are paid more. It is the same reason that top level professional Footballers get paid more than top level Rugby players. Childcare is also done in a safer and more comfortable environment. Jobs are remunerated on the basis of how profitable they are, how difficult they are to recruit for and the working conditions. They are not remunerated on the basis of the genitals of the majority of the workforce. And nobody is stopping women taking the higher paying career.
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Nov 28, 2018 7:49:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 28, 2018 9:53:48 GMT
Holy crap! COULD you be any more stupid? The point is WHY are metal workers ( of any stripe) paid more than child care worker who are better educated and doing a more important job.... IF it is not sexism. Everybody knows engineering jobs make more money than education jobs, because their industry is more profitable. It makes more money. Do you know why male American basketball players in the NBA make more than the females in the WNBA? Surely even you would admit that is fair. Also, you are confusing the qualifications. The comparison is NOT to a 4 year degree. Cert III metal fabrication TAFE courses are longer than the cert III early childhood courses. Once again, women know this going in. Personally, I chose a lower paying medical profession for the flexibility, and the rewards of helping people over more profitable sectors. I don't complain about it though. If money was my main concern, I would have chosen a higher paying profession, with the added stress levels, and the decrease in personal satisfaction from doing good all day. No one is forcing women in roles that are known to make less money. Also, as far as I can tell the median wages are actually almost identical. www.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Sheet_Metal_Worker/Hourly_Ratewww.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Early_Childhood_Educator_(ECE)/Hourly_Rate puvo and goz : You are both right. On the one hand, jobs in engineering are more profitable than jobs in social work, and women are in theory free to choose jobs where they want. But on the other hand: Why are jobs in social work less profitable, when it's just as important work? One answer is: Because it's mainly considered "women's work", and this is usually paid less. Reason: For centuries, women have been doing these jobs for free; as wives. And thousands of years of patriarchy will not be overcome in a few decades of women's liberation. Another thing: Girls are still sometimes frowned upon when they do express an interest in science or engineering. This has gotten more tolerant in the past decades, but we have still a long way to go. Well explained in this cartoon.
|
|
|
Post by dividavi on Nov 28, 2018 22:53:56 GMT
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 28, 2018 23:19:40 GMT
Everybody knows engineering jobs make more money than education jobs, because their industry is more profitable. It makes more money. Do you know why male American basketball players in the NBA make more than the females in the WNBA? Surely even you would admit that is fair. Also, you are confusing the qualifications. The comparison is NOT to a 4 year degree. Cert III metal fabrication TAFE courses are longer than the cert III early childhood courses. Once again, women know this going in. Personally, I chose a lower paying medical profession for the flexibility, and the rewards of helping people over more profitable sectors. I don't complain about it though. If money was my main concern, I would have chosen a higher paying profession, with the added stress levels, and the decrease in personal satisfaction from doing good all day. No one is forcing women in roles that are known to make less money. Also, as far as I can tell the median wages are actually almost identical. www.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Sheet_Metal_Worker/Hourly_Ratewww.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Early_Childhood_Educator_(ECE)/Hourly_Rate puvo and goz : You are both right. On the one hand, jobs in engineering are more profitable than jobs in social work, and women are in theory free to choose jobs where they want. But on the other hand: Why are jobs in social work less profitable, when it's just as important work? One answer is: Because it's mainly considered "women's work", and this is usually paid less. Reason: For centuries, women have been doing these jobs for free; as wives. And thousands of years of patriarchy will not be overcome in a few decades of women's liberation. Another thing: Girls are still sometimes frowned upon when they do express an interest in science or engineering. This has gotten more tolerant in the past decades, but we have still a long way to go. Well explained in this cartoon. In theory? In reality too. Who is doing this frowning? The female dominated teaching industry? Parents? The fields themselves, desperately trying to attract more females who simply dont want to be in the field?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 29, 2018 8:54:18 GMT
In theory? In reality too. Who is doing this frowning? The female dominated teaching industry? Parents? The fields themselves, desperately trying to attract more females who simply dont want to be in the field? There are plenty of articles on the Internet that explain it better than me. Google is your friend. Here's one for starters. www.theengineer.co.uk/negative-perceptions-girls-engineering/
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 29, 2018 11:32:56 GMT
In theory? In reality too. Who is doing this frowning? The female dominated teaching industry? Parents? The fields themselves, desperately trying to attract more females who simply dont want to be in the field? There are plenty of articles on the Internet that explain it better than me. Google is your friend. Here's one for starters. www.theengineer.co.uk/negative-perceptions-girls-engineering/"My journey into bicycle engineering was undramatic and pleasant, largely unaffected by being in a female minority." "At last, I heard meaningful questions from the girls, and they were shocking. They wanted to know how I deal with daily sexist comments, how I work around being ignored, or whether being bullied makes me upset. I was quick to myth-bust this hostile image. That’s not my experience. My colleagues are kind and respectful people who’d be horrified by behaviour like this. If I ever encountered such behaviour, I’d report it and be supported by my employer." "Since “I’m an Engineer” Brompton has hired two more design engineers on my team, and now my team is majority female. But the fact is the balance never phased me. That’s what I want these girls to know; don’t fear being a woman amongst men. You’ll be welcomed as an engineer amongst engineers." Your "start point" didn't come close to answering my question. It actually supported what I'm saying. She had no gendered barriers to entering her profession. It was, and is, welcoming. So, who is doing the frowning? Seems to me girls are taught to believe they will be victims, from a young age. By feminists. The wage gap garbage isn't helping them shake that.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 29, 2018 12:33:14 GMT
Seems to me girls are taught to believe they will be victims, from a young age. Correct. Wrong. The wage gap garbage isn't helping them shake that. Fixed.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 29, 2018 12:49:55 GMT
Seems to me girls are taught to believe they will be victims, from a young age. Correct. Wrong. The wage gap garbage isn't helping them shake that. Fixed. Who is teaching women they are going to be victims from a young age, if not feminists? Are you going to tell me who is doing the frowning you claimed is happening or not? You have claimed it happens. You claimed there is still long way to go. In reality, engineering fields are clamouring for women to enter the field. The article YOU posted showed they are welcomed and supported by colleagues and employers alike. There are many scholarships open to women only to help them enter the field. So, who is it? You can't honestly tell me the biggest barrier to women in STEM is not women themselves not wanting to be in STEM. The wage gap myth is garbage, and it is teaching girls they are going to be victims as women in the work force, due to sexist oppression. What they aren't taught is they on average earn less due to the choices they, on average, make. Women can do whatever they want. Certainly STEM fields, if they want to earn good money. They choose not to. Man, I miss those feminists. The "women are awesome, they can do anything men can do, if they want" feminists have been replaced "You are a victim, and you will be a victim of men and patriarchy" feminists.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Nov 29, 2018 12:55:08 GMT
Seems to me girls are taught to believe they will be victims, from a young age. Correct. Wrong. The wage gap garbage isn't helping them shake that. Fixed. Also, you didnt even read the article you posted, it would seem. It outlined one woman's experience in a welcoming and supportive industry, from employers and colleagues alike, and showed young girls buying into a FALSE victim narrative. It certainly didn't support your point that women/girls showing interest in STEM fields are frowned upon. Here is an article for you. Not saying its comprehensive, or perfect or anything, but a good starter. www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more-gender-equality-the-fewer-women-in-stem/553592/
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 29, 2018 13:36:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Nov 29, 2018 13:42:07 GMT
Women are free to enter either qualification. They choose not to enter the ones that make more money. A big reason that on average, they earn less than men. She did not make a good point. Holy crap! COULD you be any more stupid? The point is WHY are metal workers ( of any stripe) paid more than child care worker who are better educated and doing a more important job.... IF it is not sexism. It's not sexism. It's capitalism. Pure and simple. Some jobs are simply put: more valuable than others.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 29, 2018 13:47:42 GMT
Excellent article, which proves mine and goz 's point. I thought about linking in a previous post of mine, but thought that one article would be enough. The point is: When there is no gender pay gap, and people in non-STEM professions get payed as much as people in STEM professions, then people will choose careers according to their liking. But in many countries, there is an indirect gender pay gap ("women's work" is paid less), so women who want financial freedom choose STEM, even if they don't like it. But in countries with little gender pay gap, direct or indirect, like in Norway, people choose what they want to do. Maybe Norway should rule the world.
|
|