Whitty “I believe women have the same OPPORTUNITYS as men,”

If they have not they certainly should and the outcome of who gets to aspire to fulfill any opportunity should be based on the merit of the individual.

Ultimately, in the debate of this nature, based on gender, it comes down to “what is best for everyone”.

For the antagonists, protagonists and the bystanders it is best for the individual who is most likely to achieve the best outcomes, to aspire to prominence through any selection process, regardless of their gender.

Fractelle “The Hoi polloi – that’s you and me folks.
This consists of two layers:

1. Cannon Fodder. . .”

The vocabulary of your post dates your thinking.

“The Hoi polloi “ and “cannon fodder” were expressions in general currency at the beginning of the 20th century,

You are one hundred years out of date

As for the “divide and conquer”, let us consider the benefits of modern capitalism, like inventing all those cute household appliances which allow the “baby-machines” to spend more quality time “aspiring to careers” than being “tied to the kitchen sink” or kept “barefoot and pregnant” and the “cannon fodder”, after a hard day at work returning home in the ‘burbs, well away from the sound of the factory siren.

If what you post is what you believe, it explains why you have problems finding “satisfaction” living in the 21st century.

“Divide and conquer” were parts of the Marxist dogma, used to foment revolution between “the classes”.

Well Marxism and its acolyte, socialism, have consistently failed to produce comparable social and “life quality” benefits to those experienced through “the capitalist consumer revolution” for all classes, of either gender.

But socialism and Marxism, like you, are stuck in history and are incapable of evolving, like libertarian capitalism, to address the needs of all, regardless of gender or century.

Which might explain the underlying cynicism of your post.

R0bert

‘When women get paid less for doing the same job as a male it's discrimination, when women get paid less for choosing a lower paid job or for working less hours or having less experience it's not discrimination.’

It IS discrimination! Oppressed people make just as many choices as non-oppressed people. It’s just that their choices are much more controlled. Choices are made within a system of conventions, restraints and historical precedent – of which gender forms a major part. For example, a woman who ‘chooses’ to work part-time because society’s messages have taught her that her toddler would suffer psychologically if she were to put him/her in child care for long hours at a stretch – when society has not fed her husband the same guilt about working full time – is a ‘choice’ borne of gender oppression, not to mention double standards.

Also, workforce participation is not in itself an explanation for the gender income gap. It's extremely difficult to ascertain that women and men are being equally paid for equal work, especially when so many jobs carry negotiated ‘salary packages’ for the same work or role. On the basis of historical precedent alone, no prizes for guessing which gender has the greater confidence to command, and get, the higher salaries.

Fractelle

I agree with Ginx. Great post! And so true.

Ah SJF, what you are implying is that when it comes to salaries,
men have better negotiating skills then women, so they land up
with higher salaries.

That could well be true. So if women have such poor negotiating
skills, that they are unable to negotiate a fair salary for
themselves, why should they be paid the same salaries, given
their relative lack of skills?

Whitty: “As does trotting out the term misogynist to any male that disagrees with any feminist position.”

HRS: “If someone questions feminism, the normal response from a feminist is to say that the person is a misogynist.”

This is what interests me. No female poster has accused anyone of being a misogynist on this thread. I can't remember hearing it on OLO - certainly not just for questioning feminism. And yet there are heaps of men questioning feminism and disagreeing with feminist positions right here. They have are met with feisty counter-argument, but they're in no immediate danger of being labeled a misogynist.

So, if it doesn’t happen here, then where? You're saying that, in some other arena of life, women are “trotting out” the term, that it’s a normal response to questioning feminism. I love to hear some concrete examples.

And also, given that it's so prevalent elsewhere, why do you think it *doesn't* happen on OLO?

Sheesh! Women: damned if they do and damned if they don’t…

On one hand we have Yabby claiming that women in prehistoric times sat demurely picking berries till the menfolk arrived home with haunch of mammoth. On the other we have HRS who, in his many posts, claims that women are more aggressive than men and intent on world domination.

Some common sense please.

1. Fact; hunting large game animals took time and cooperation between hunters. The hunters would be away for long periods of time, days or even weeks. Given that there are plenty of strong, able women in this day and age, it is reasonable to posit that in prehistoric times some women went hunting with the men.

2. While the hunters were away the tribe still needed protein (does Yabby think that people simply sat and starved?) the smaller tribe members (women, children, elderly men) were perfectly capable of bringing down small game using nets, traps or bows and arrows as well as foraging for edible plants. This also required intelligence, skill and cooperation.

What all this resulted in is the bleeding obvious that among the sexes there are some very brutal aggressive women and some quiet placid men. We as humans all share the same characteristics to a greater or lesser degree.

Think of the bell curve; the extreme macho male at one end, the extreme femme at the other while the bulk of the rest of us are found in the middle.

This means some men make great parents and some women make great corporate leaders. The problem is that there is currently a power imbalance between the sexes. Why it is coming to a head now, is that for the first time in history women are as well educated as the men and have the same opportunities. The problem is that a few men can’t deal with it and feel threatened.

HRS

You’re quite correct, my use of the word ‘dinosaur’ was incorrect – they were very successful creatures, I should have said ‘anachronism’ and here’s a little cartoon you should appreciate:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2130/2288205407_fc58e945b2.jpg?v=0

Peace

Vanilla,
The word misogynist is probably one of the words most often used by feminists to abuse others.

I have been called misogynist many times by various feminists (and in particular by the highly abusive feminists Turnrightthenleft and a C.J Morgan) This is interesting because I don’t think I have said one negative thing about women.

It is also routinely said that men who question feminism are “bitter”. This is another form of abuse from feminists.

There is no equality in feminism. The real history of feminism is complete discrimination and social disharmony.

Feminists have gone into politics:- There are no policies for men by any major political party in the country, but every party has a policy for women

Feminists have gone into law:- Males are now considered guilty until they can prove themselves innocent.

Feminists have gone into Familty law:- The greatest human rights abuses in this country are now occurring in the Family law area.

Feminists have gone into social science: - Social science now has no credibility, and many people no longer consider it a science, but simply a propaganda system for feminism.

Feminists are entering into education systems:- There are now teachers who consider boys to be of no value other than future tradesmen.

Feminists talk about “women and their children”:- About one in 4 households in Australia is now a single person household, with that number growing each year.

This is some of the real history of feminism, that feminist will rarely talk about.