I love living in a 'patriarchy'

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by lepustimidus, Aug 28, 2008.

  1. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    My Mom could never have had the chance to be president, walk on the moon, fly a fighter jet. My Dad could have done all those things.
    She got $150 a month in child support for 3 kids, while my Dad went and lived the bachelor life. New car, parties, 19 yr old girlfriend while we sat and watched TV at his house on weekends because he sent all his money to our Mom so he was broke. whatever.
    In '84 he paid $100 a month, in '86 he paid $50 a month. Meanwhile he was making 3x the money my Mom made.

    I have raised my son without any help from his father. Not a dime in child support.

    And considering you don't pay child support lepus, why are you whining about it? And the data you have is so old, I may as well complain about women not being allowed to vote.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. angrybellsprout paultard since 2002 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,251
    The pay gap myth is a funny one.

    Mod Note: This post has been edited to remove extraneous, insulting content. If the point cannot be made without trying to pick a fight, then perhaps you ought to think again about whether or not the point should be made at all.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 1, 2008
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    Then why did President Kennedy sign the Equal Pay Act, making it illegal to pay men and women employed in the same establishment different wages for equal work?
    Women are still trying to catch up
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    Orleander what did you think of women tennis players claiming the same prise money even though they play less tennis?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It can also be argued that they bring less money into the sport from TV and corprote sponsors but i dont know that either way
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    lepustimidus:

    Your attempt to say that the experiences of hereditary female rulers prior to 1900 is representative of the average woman's experience at that time has a whiff of desperation about it.

    But keep trying...
     
  9. angrybellsprout paultard since 2002 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,251
    Next you are going to tell me about how blacks still have to drink from their own water fountians and are arrested if they sit in the front of a bus?
     
  10. lucifers angel same shit, differant day!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,590
    that is rubbish, has i said i have a male friend now, who's ex gf has disaeepred with his daughter and he has been given all sorts of assistance from certain offical offices, if you are male or famale they will help you find your kids, when dads/mums say they wont help me look for my kids to me that means they cant be bothered
     
  11. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,634
    I think there is evidence, if you are willing to wade through the data. See, for example, here: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/censusandstatistics/a/paygapgrows.htm and
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=azcypNg00in0&refer=us

    The open question, about which there is debate is whether the gap exists because sexist men pay women less or some other factor. There are then a variety of sub-issues, such as, if the possibility of women taking maternity leave makes them less valuable employees,[super]1[/super] is it okay to pay them less as a result? In that case, and others, it makes rational economic sense to 'discriminate,' so the question is "Is rational discrimination based on sex okay?"[super]2[/super]

    ------------
    1. It probably does reduce their value as employees, since emploers get less of a return for an investment in training due to the time off, and women on maternity leave often do not come back to work, choosing to raise the children instead. While men sometimes take paternity leave, it tends to be for a shorter period and they are more likely to return to work afterwards, since society frowns on "househusbands."

    2. In some contexts it is. No one insists that we hire actresses to play male roles in movies. It's legal to hire only attractive women at Hooters, and to require the visibly pregnant ones to stay home. It's legal to hire only people who can benchpress 200 pounds to be firefighters (notwithstanding that that standard disproportionately affects women).
    -----------
     
  12. Cellar_Door Whose Worth's unknown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,310
    Weak and pathetic? Looking after a baby is a demanding job - what are they supposed to do, give all their wages to a nanny to bring up their child, just so they can say they aren't on benefits?

    And you think single fathers don't get help? The term is 'single parent' not 'single mother'.
     
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,374
    Anyone? Anyone?

    You know ... slaves in the South before the Civil War didn't have to pay rent or buy their own food. Hell, they even got a free boat ride across the Atlantic, unlike the European indentured servants. What's all this about white supremacy?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    President Kennedy was awesome. Why did they kill that poor man?
     
  15. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    Oh COME ON!!! You didn't say anything about lepus using 1988 data or bringing up female rulers from other centuries!
    I follow his lead and you gripe at me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    see how you are.
     
  16. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    James R:
    Fantastic response to my observation that, contrary to what you previously claimed, women did indeed indirectly influence (and in the cases of monarch and nobility, directly influence) politics in a patriarchy. Does it feel good to be caught with your pants down?

    The fact of the matter is that many times during history, women sent men to fight and die in war. The opposite did not occur. Men never (that I am aware of) forced women to fight and die in wars. The implication here is inescapable: If what occurred in previous centuries was a patriarchy, the system wasn't 100% in favour of males. Males also suffered under the 'patriarchy'.

    Orleander:
    The data cited was from back in 1991, long after Women's Suffrage occurred. But yeah, your point is noted. The data probably isn't relevant to the present. How recent do you want the data?

    Chance and reality differ significantly. In reality, only a tiny proportion of males got the chances you listed above. Most lived in abject poverty, working their fingers to the bone to support their families.

    I'd argue that under the patriarchy, women in general actually had a better quality of life than males, which might partially explain the significant discrepancy in life expectancies between the genders.

    Pand:
    Yeah, exactly.
     
  17. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    Orleander:
    So a patriarchy didn't exist back in the Middle Ages, in both Europe and the Ottoman Empire?
     
  18. Cellar_Door Whose Worth's unknown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,310
    I did read the opening post, but I don't see how it proves that mothers get more benefits than fathers. I think it has more to do with a mindset - the male feels like he should be out providing, but a female feels marginally less guilty staying at home with her offspring.
     
  19. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    doesn't that mean the family lived in abject poverty? Or did the women and children live in glory while the man lived under the porch?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    And by the way, most people in the US have never lived in abject poverty.
     
  20. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    Orleander:
    It means that the man is out working a shitty job to make ends meet, while the woman is at home raising the children and keeping the home. I'd argue that the latter is more fulfilling and enjoyable. And in many cases, easier. Yeah, that's right, I said it. Childrearing and housekeeping are easier than many manual jobs that men had to perform.

    Aren't the lower class the most numerous in any society? Maybe 'abject poverty' is a bit of hyperbole on my behalf, but most families throughout America's history were poor, with the males working low end manual jobs. They struggled to make ends meet.

    My point is that while men might have had the choice to become the president, in reality the probability of this occurring was slim. Most men worked shitty jobs, at shitty hours, for shitty pay. Patriarchy indeed.
     
  21. codanblad a love of bridges Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,397
    have we considered: women find it harder to get jobs, and so work less? the legal system is prejudiced against man in custody matters? wouldn't that explain the stats, partially? i agree that perhaps men should be trying harder to get money.
     
  22. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    No?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Whenever someone in my family can't open something, it's always me who's asked to wrench it open. Same when I was doing a college course, I always had to open the PVA glue and stuff like that. (Couldn't resist...)
     
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,374
    Mod Hat - Cleanup note

    Mod Hat — Cleanup note

    I have done some cleaning of this discussion. While I am grateful to certain people for their attempts to deal with questionable pretenses, unwarranted hostility, and suspect arguments, in a comparatively civil manner, some of those posts are included in this general cleanup. These posts include short responses to moderated content and short quips that, ultimately, contribute nothing substantial to the greater discussion.

    That said, carry on.
     

Share This Page