Rhian,

You make my point about why men shouldn't try to please feminists very well.

You even linked to a website called 'radstats'! Was that a joke? Am I really suppose to take statistics produced by a group who call themselves 'radical statistics' seriously? what does it say about you that you take such advocacy seriously?

'And women are more likely than men to do unpaid work, whether in the home, in charities or in family businesses. Personally, I don't get too upset by this - there are many reasons for it, of which discrimination is probably a relatively minor contributor. But it does have flow-on consequences in areas like retirement income'

So women decide to work less hours, in jobs they enjoy in comparison with men who work longer hours in jobs that meet their families financial needs (i.e. they may hate their job but do it because someone has to be responsible) but it is women hating to point this out and ask women to take responsibilty for themselves? And you can't see where your sense of entitlement comes from?

You consumerism remark is just as funny. Next you'll be telling me you're sick of walking into department stores and seeing floors and floors of mens consmetics, shoes, and clothing while poor women only get a quarter of floor 5 or something. Your apparently genuine belief that women don't spend more than men betrays how blinded by ideology you are.

Here's a link to Steffi Graff receiving a marriage proposal. This is from the real world not some ideologically driven man hating journal. Note her reply.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYxlKbe0WZY

Yabby

Yabbly

You say it is a “mere obvious fact” that women are "better at" complaining . Its not “obvious” to me.

If there are more threads complaining about women’s lot than men’s, there are two possible explanations:

1. Women are more inclined to complain than men
2. Women have more to complain about than men

I'm inclined to conclude the latter.

Anyway, most posters here (and many others that touch on gender inequality, in my observation), are complaining about the raw deal that men get, not women. Cheryl and I have pointed out that women don’t earn as much as men or get as much super, but both of us say there are reasons for that.

Most importantly, We have not made categorical statements about men and their motives, behaviour and shared flaws in the way that you and other hostile posters have about women.

I have good male friend who is phobic about spiders and indeed freaks out about their webs, let alone the beasts themselves. And if you reckon nagging is a uniquely female talent, let me introduce you to my husband!

My point is, the root of bigotry is to make negative generalisations about a group of people and use that to draw conclusions about individual members of that group in order to dismiss them or treat them less favourably. The inference of these posts is that women don’t have enough to retire on because they spend their money on botox, they have plenty of money because they gouge their male ex-partners, or their complaints can be dismissed are merely characteristic self-serving whinging.

All provide an excuse to play the (wo)man, not the ball.

Dane
Combining paid and unpaid work, women work the hours as men (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4153.02006?OpenDocument). Housework and child care contribute to household wellbeing no less than paid work, and is often grindingly dull.

I didn’t say women spend less than men. Women do most of the household shopping, for example. The point is whether women spend more on non-essentials. Men spend more on gambling and alcohol, women on makeup and hairdos. So what?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-419040/Women-talk-times-men-says-study.html

Rhian, seems to me that you are not a very good observer of human
behaviour. Women in general, (there are always exceptions) talk
more then men and part of being female is telling others how you
feel. Part of all that talking is complaining. Many a man has done
what men do, ie suggest solutions to their many complaints and
problems. Only to have it made plain, they don't want solutions
but only somebody to listen to their many grievances. Its a well
known girl thing. (yes, there are always exceptions)

This article was yet another complaint, about women earning less
then men. Did anyone point out that they might just be poorer
negotiators then men? I take note of what successfull women have
to say and they don't mention glass ceilings, but of course its a
great excuse for some women, who refuse to accept their own failings.

*2. Women have more to complain about than men
I'm inclined to conclude the latter.*

Well hang on. In the real world, men earn most of the money. Women
get most of it in the divorce courts. Women call the shots in bed.
Many a hen pecked husband agrees to she who must be obeyed, just
to get a bit of sex occasionally. The housework must be done to
her standards, its her kitchen, her house, the toilet seat must be
down for her, not up for him. etc.

Fact is that on OLO we get these regular "Poor women" threads, which
kind of make my point for me. As some of us who are men, post on
OLO anyhow, pointing out that its more feminist propaganda is quite
reasonable, IMHO.

That does not mean that somebody like me hates women. Its just that
I am aware of the cushy deal that we have given them, by swinging
the pendulum well past any middle point of what is fair and just.

rhian,

If women earned their own money and spent their own money I would absolutely agree with your 'so what'. But the problem the men here are complaining about is that women work less than men because they choose to and then complain about having less super. The implication being that they should get some sort of preferential treatment where they work less for more money.

The men here are being accused of women hating because they point out that our society is already geared to transfer wealth from men to women.

It's also most probably true that men spend more on alcohol and gambling than women (although an awful lot of women enjoy a wine) but the fact is women have less super than men. So however much men spend on alcohol and gambling it is not enough to reduce their savings to the level of women's 'lifestyle' choices (on average).

Yabby,
Yes I would agree with that.

Women (and by that I mean the majority of women) have to whinge and whine to get at the money that is mostly earnt by men.

And they have to make men look guilty of something or other, so men feel obliged to give them money.

And we also get a plethora of articles that make women looked oppressed and suppressed, so everyone thinks they should get more money.

But whether or not they deserve more money is another matter.

I think that the modern women really doesn't deserve much at all simply by being the modern woman.

'hen pecked husband', 'whining women', 'nagging women', one can almost see 1950s Australia from some of the previous posts - where women sat out in the car in the car park and drank because they we're allowed in the hotel if there wasn't a saloon. Astounding stuff. Hang on to those prejudices fellas. They're so endearing. Do your knuckles scape on the ground when you walk?

Re super, if you take as your first principle that women earn less on average over the life span than men and that events such as doing unpaid work as per a housewife are the norm (or dependent on another earner's salary), then it's not only reasonable, but correct to infer that women per se will have less superannuation.

Will all women have less superannuation than men? No. That is because we can't list every single case but if you have a look at mature age earnings from 55-64, super payouts by gender in the 55-64 cohort, you will see that a social problem emerging and it is the rise of older women who are divorced or caring for a sick husband or family.