Assuming you mean women get paid less than men, that's not true in the major dating demographic. In young, single adults working full time, there is no pay gap.
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
This actually got me thinking a bit: how do women respond/react to other women "dating down"? While uncommon it obviously happens sometimes. Maybe there is a r/AskWomen thread somewhere. I'm lonely so I can most of the time only check out assumed pairings when I'm outside (the supermarket, for example) and the looks in those people usually match (or colloquially they "looksmatch"). Rarely do I see a hottie with an average dude, and in the other direction I'm too biased to comment on.
But through example I know what it is when an average guy dates up a little bit: a classmate of mine did some 70-hour weeks during the summer and took his gf to a first class trip to Norway that cost 6000€. He's a plain and pasty dude and she is maybe a 7/10 on a good day. So does the earning difference even it out? I wouldn't spend that much money on a vacation unless the girl was a smokin' 10/10, but I dunno, maybe I'm cheap.
Something something you're meant to work for us you plebian now let us get back to our champagne don't you know in our socialist utopia you've never had it so good? something something.
7% of one's annual income is a metric fuckton.
It's equivalent to working almost a full month without being paid. And that difference compounds every year the gap exists.
Last edited:
Also worth pointing out that's an average based across all careers.
You want to know where the biggest games were found?
Performing arts and sports.
In the first instance it's where people generally negotiate contracts and are paid based on perception of name recognition and pull.
The second being a field where pay is based on advertising and popularity and people paying to see the thing.
There's actually fields where women on average can earn 97% more than most men in said fields too
1. Gergar stated that the 7% he was talking about was within the same occupation. Meaning that your post here is irrelevant.
2. Your own posts regularly contain absolute bonkers nonsense even when you include sources. Forgive me for not taking this post at face value when there is nothing backing it.
1. Yes but that's an average based on all fields. That's like saying "On average more men die in work related accidents than women so we need to make offices safer for men" it fails to recognise the usefulness and applicability of a macro average to micro scenarios.
2. So to be clear you want me to source basic understanding of the limitations of statistical models and stats?
Ok if you insist?
BBC Radio 4 - More or Less
Tim Harford explains the numbers and statistics used in everyday life
Stating a fact is not sophistry.
I've told you the definition I'll accept for pornography: a work with the primary purpose of arousing the audience. Really simple and pretty much universally agreed. Everybody here actually knows that's the primary purpose of pornography.
That's true. Nobody disputed it.
I dispute the idea that someone should be suspended for pointing kids towards a public library that carries those books.
I didn't say she was fired.
You DID say she wasn't suspended.
You were factually wrong.
It's not factually wrong to believe school library books are part of the schools budget.
Literally no part of this incident concerns whether or not these books should be in the school library. She was suspended for pointing kids towards a list curated by the Brooklyn Library which had the books on it, alongside many hundreds of others. There's no indication any specific books from that list were in the Oklahoma school libraries.
The state's sole involvement here was mandating that certain books in Oklahoma schools should be covered (not removed) if they contain potentially controversial content. I'd say the state's direction was far too vague to have a good legal role and could easily be weaponised against books that conservatives simply don't like.
School board & admin were wrong for suspending a teacher for pointing kids towards a public library and a list of frequently-banned books which is nationally recognised.
Parent wasn't wrong. They just complained about something they objected to, they're perfectly within their rights. I think the complaint is a bit silly but it's all subjective.
OK.
So, for instance, do you think teachers should be suspended for "advertising pornography" if they link to (say) the front page of Wikipedia?
Because the Wikipedia article on sex has some images of sex. They're obviously not arousing, but you don't care about that-- you've made it clear they still constitute pornography. And it's possible that the front page of Wiki might lead someone to the sex article.
Should the teacher be suspended?
Ah, you're right that that is probably the list the parent saw-- I didn't spot that one.
I mean, I didn't exactly consciously ignore it-- it's less prominent than the navigation paths either me or Dwarven took, and is under a description about finding books at local New York libraries.
But yeah, that's probably the one.
when it's totally irrelevant it rather is sophistry.
Yes you however won't accept any other term that could appear to have negative connotations either so that's where the issue is on this point.
A specific library carrying banned book from the school.
Sorry while I'd actually be fine with a public library carrying the Anarchists cookbook I'd still object to a teacher pointing pupils towards the library and the book.
I said she wasn't fired.
She quit.
Except the tangent argument going on about the idea of said books should be allowed in them which I already explained was going on.
Knowing first hand the vagueness of curriculums and schemes of work you should never assume it gives you free reign and controversial can differ a lot from person to person. Hell also it says teach which would be do in class not exactly direct students to access the stuff in their own time.
Also schemes of work and curriculums with vagueness don't work as a defence if you screw up.
No as wikipedia is generally doesn't link to sexually explicit content on the front page. It's generally designed as a way to find information and to learn not as an entertainment piece.
Don't care if you think it's relevant. We'd have moved on long ago if you'd just admitted a factual error.
What are you even talking about? I don't really care if you want to use emotive language or language with negative connotations. I'm objecting to the use of "pornographic", because that has a specific meaning that simply does not apply.
Nope. Still zero indication that the book was ever even carried in the Oklahoma school at all. But it definitely wasn't removed from the Oklahoma school, because the state direction did not involve removing any books.
You also said she wasn't suspended. That was factually wrong.
You can repeat over and over again that you said she wasn't fired, if you want. Doesn't change the fact you also said she wasn't suspended.
You "explained it was going on", but you were mistaken. Your "tangent argument" was based on a false assumption you made: that the teacher introduced these books to the school library, and that the state/school board demanded they be removed. Absolutely none of that actually happened.
So your defence is "it's common"? OK. I don't really care. Doesn't change a single thing.
I mean, neither does the Brooklyn Library. The list doesn't show any of the sexually explicit content from 'Gender Queer' or 'Lawn Boy'. The parent had to separately search it to find that explicit content. Just like anyone on Wikipedia could search and find stuff.
Why perpetuate the correctitude fallacy which is evident as you didn't call out others for far greater factual errors?
And you also objected to sexually explicit.
So care to say how you'd define said content beyond something like "Totally suitable for all ages" ?
And yet if it were fine in the libraries then nothing would have come of this would it?
.
You can keep saying it all you like it won't make it true.
you can keep going along with what is a correctitude fallacy being played at this point if you want but you can believe what you like on this one without showing evidence just claiming I said it and hoping I take it on faith alone given the propensity for misrepresentation and outright lies that have gone on here I hope you'll understand why I refuse to believe you. If I said it quote me saying it.
I never said she did introduce them to the school library. I said part of her political shouting after it was the idea the book was fine and the political shouting of others that the book was being banned / restricted due to bigotry.
So simple answer here, do you believe the book should be in school libraries for a K-12 school and is suitable for all students there?
Yes it does.
It's reality.
It's how things are.
It's the construct we all have to live within and work within.
It's not some weird new scenario no teacher has ever run into.
except Wikipedia doesn't have a link on the home page that says why not go to back door action dot tripple x.
Worse in this case because content that's been banned or people want to ban tends to be something that teenagers will try to go after and look at as a sort of forbidden fruit thing.
The key point being Wikipedia doesn't direct to it on the home page you have to know what you're looking for. The link in question does direct to it and due to the presentation it would be appealing to young adults even without having to disclose the content to them.[/QUOTE]
Well, the only things you can do to get better at dating make more money and do exercise however if your body is already obese for example... you could try to eat less, but even for someone who gets bored of food and is obsessed with either work or video games, even that gets hard.
Funny story I wanted to date someone who made slightly more money than me and was 5 years older, but my parents who are more traditionalist disagree with it and wanted to kick me out of their house, granted neither of us had our own house, we were both given houses by our parents, but we did get along and talked well. I was around 25, and she was 30, and she was very pretty, but sadly the deal breaker with my parents was that she wasn't a virgin. It's sad because I generally liked her looks and personality.
I also once dated someone who ended up taking a job in Shenzhen, and I didn't want to move back to China since I forgot the language, and she didn't want to move to the US due to her pharma job. I broke up with her first because I care about her, and wanted her to be happy, and later on, she dated someone below her. I wasn't bitter as I agree she needed to be happy.
The average height of a man is 170ish cm
The average height of a woman is 160ish cm
The difference heights are 6%. Let's use your logic here - Are you saying that the average female is the same height as a male or is this percentage enough to say there is some difference between them
Why argue for umpteen posts instead of simply admitting there isn't a penis in the picture?
The reason I'm arguing on this specific point is that you accused me of being a liar, when I was factually correct and you were just mistaken.
Why? It's only relevant that its not pornographic or "erotica".
No idea. Not really interested in speculating about scenarios that didn't happen. We don't know, since they weren't in the school library.
It's literally true that you said she wasn't suspended. It's literally true that she was suspended.
Probably not, no. But the book wasn't in the school library, so that's completely irrelevant.
You've over and over again said that this impacted the school budget, because of them being in the school library. So yes, you believed they were in the school library.
So you think if something's common, that makes it automatically fine?
Neither does the Brooklyn Public Library site. The parent in question had to go out of her way to search for the contents of a book elsewhere.
That hasn't been assumed for more than 30 years. They've refined the variables many times to get the number you gave (also, I think the Australian number is 4% off hand)
It's also not relevant to the argument at hand
Most women choose men of equal or greater height because.... most men are of equal or greater height. It's the same with pay
(This is not to say that there arent gold diggers. But most women arent gold diggers.)
You do understand that what you did was the equivalent of going to a thread in the escapist forums about controversial video games, immediately clicking the Reviews tab, and saying "these are all super main stream video games, why does anyone think this is controversial?"