Continuing..

In the meantime everything went back to normal. The robots were even more rude and obnoxious than before. Men even opened doors for them but NEVER, NEVER treated them as equals, only with the respect that you would show any pest like a crocodile or a heather-mill. For they knew these robots with their selfish multiple breeding ways would spell the end of Australia, environmentally, socially and culturally. We were all going to die as sure as interest rates rose. But we accepted our fate knowing it would be amongst such beauty, such unfulfilled concupiscence. And the smells of our sewers as they poisoned the oceans and changed the climate would be oh so redolent of perfume and lipstick and sanitary pads.

But hark! A late revival ....

Someone suggested all robot makers only make ONE robot per maker because of PEAKOIL, OVERPOPULATION of the planet and looming wars for SHORT SUPPLY. Could it be? Could robot makers and robot women actually play their part in securing all our futures. Could they at last be safely treated with respect and treated as equals with equal pay?

Only time will tell.

Browyn,
I understand that quite a few feminist won't acknowledge International Men's Day (being believers in equality and non-haters of men and all that), so I'm wondering what you did to celebrate International Men's Day last year?

pdev: "The arguement about stalling womens' salaries/advancement I believe is more complicated than what the author presents. "

That pretty much sums it up. I did some analysis of the ABS census data linked to in the article. On average the working female's gross earnings were about 65% of the males. That seems quite significant until you break it down using the other data available. Once you normalise the earnings for hours worked (22%), industry participation (5%), occupation/position (6%) and experience (using age, 1.5%) you get numbers that suggest pay ratios much closer to 1 than the article suggests.

There are additional factors that could be considered as well:

such as the gender effect on career ambitions. Looking at the typical child bearing ages, 80% of unemployed men were seeking full time work (vs part time) yet only 50% of unemployed women were seeking full time work. This demonstrates that men will, on average, have a stronger commitment to their career which will lead to greater achievement and hence higher earning. It also demonstrates that this difference is the result of the women's goals rather than sexist restrictions by the employer.

Incidentally men spend on average 8 hours more at work than women while only doing an average 6 hours less housework, who's working harder again?

"anywhere from 40 to 57 per cent of Australian women will experience physical or sexual violence at some point in their lives."

The last figures I've seen suggest that men are much more likely to experience violence than women.

HRS. What was your experience of "Mens Day", and how many turned up!

Vanilla, Pelican et al.

Waddya think of the "Woman-as-robot" analogy?

I reckon its worth at least a 6. If not for originality then at least as a change from the statutory i-have-never-seen-a-woman-with-a-black-eye/as-Daphne-(or dear-maggie)-says and dodgy statistics?

And oooh, the wealth of Freudian connotations therein!

- women do more than twice as many hours of unpaid domestic work than men, provide the most unpaid childcare and family care, and do more voluntary work;

See http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/B2EDB0EA36DE7402CA2570EC000CBB46?opendocument for a discussion of this.

- anywhere from 40 to 57 per cent of Australian women will experience physical or sexual violence at some point in their lives. Staggering statistics when we consider that Australia’s population is now more than 21 million;

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4B2A703C9CB10C90CA25732C00207D2C?opendocument "In 2005, 11% of men and 6% of women aged 18 years and over reported at least one experience of violence during the last 12 months."

- Australia and the US remain the only OECD countries without publicly funded maternity leave;

WHy maternity leave rather than parenting leave?

- women hold just 7 per cent of the top earner positions (80 positions out of total of 1,136);

Some discussion of changes to income and factors at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/1B800D50E9945B6BCA2570EC000CBB42?opendocument
"In 1982, 8% of all women were in the highest income quintile, compared with 11% in 1999-2000."

The points in the authors bullet points are not specifically covered but it's clear that the major factor in the difference between mens and womens income is workforce participation. Not the only factor but significant.

I'm wondering if those who applauded this article did so mainly because of the expected reaction froom James, HRS and others rather than because of any real feeling that the article provided a legitimate represention of the issues.

The author is using part of the detail to paint a misleading picture. We give Boazy curry for doing it about muslims, why congratulate this author for trying to mislead by presenting selective information here?

There are areas where women still don't get a fair go but this type of distortion may be one of the reasons why "Many women, particularly young women, shudder at being labelled a feminist and are reluctant to speak or act.". It's spin designed to misrepresent, who can blame many women for not wanting to be identified with this stuff.

R0bert