Why I Fight.

[Silvanus]

Although I can't speak for the UK, in the US there is mountains of evidence that the "wage gap" is, at best, statistical sleight of hand and, at worst, non-existent.

Spoiler: Links spoilered for length.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579483752909957472

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-biggest-myth-about-the-gender-wage-gap/276367/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/

Though I'm not going to subscribe to be able to read the WSJ article, the first two sources seem to be claiming that the wage gap simply isn't as large as was believed, and may be partway attributable to factors other than discrimination. That's very different from KingsGambit's bold claim that it definitely isn't there at all.

The third source is disputing the commonly-cited "77 cents" statistic, but includes a graph that indicates an existent (though smaller) pay gap. In fact, all those sources are referring in various fashions to the same argument, and the same points. It's an argument with merit, but it is far from the argument KingsGambit was making.

It does for me since I've seen first hand that it's untrue. There is no more compelling evidence than what one sees for themselves. Any stats you dig up do not account for womens' choices of profession, largely lower paid clerical, administrative, secretarial, educational, care and other similar roles (as well as stay-at-home mums). If one compared 10 nurses or primary school teachers with 10 engineers or 10 electricians the comparison is one of apples and oranges. Compare however a male teacher with a female teacher and, excepting for length of service or special duties, two employees in the same department doing the same job will earn the same wage. FACT. There are (and have been for years) women in high paid jobs, leadership roles and who own their own businesses. FACT. Any woman can make of herself anything she can and chooses to. FACT.

No, anecdotal evidence is not the most "compelling" evidence. Different people have different experiences. I'm after something rather more solid than claims and anecdotes.

Fight all you want. Just know that your chosen soapbox is irrelevant, outdated, fading into obscurity as more and more people are alienated by its perpetual myths and nonsense that are disproven daily in real life. More and more people realise it's nonsense and won't associate with it. And good riddance too. You can fight, and I can ignore and challenge, go free society! Discrimination does need to go away, but feminism perpetuates discrimination against men and is not the right vehicle any more.

What discrimination against men?

I've seen this claim so very many times, and it's never supported with anything reputable or trustworthy.

 

[Pieturli]

And right now, that world does not exist.

You're fighting a good fight OP, hat's off to you.

I think a nice thing we can all remind ourselves of is that despite us in the west (counting North America, Western and Northern Europe) still having problems with how we treat women, sexual minorities and even ethnic minorities, huge progress has been made and that progress is continuing. We are miles ahead of almost every other part of the world when it comes to almost all areas of human rights. The one exception I can think of is how well some South-East Asian countries treat transgendered people. Today is the best time to be a woman or gay (that sounded profoundly stupid, I apologize) that there has ever been. I'm not saying there aren't problems still, just saying that I think you and others should take heart in how much we have progressed.




This topic reminds me of MHRA's. I've got a little hypothesis that people who moan about how straight white guys are being persecuted have a terribly skewed view of feminists/LGBT folks. It seems that their impression of feminism comes primarily from their own imaginations and tumblr. Now sure, there are legitimate crazies in feminism (Andrea Dworkin, anyone?) but the impression I get is that they are in an absolutely microscopic minority. The Social Justice Warriors on tumblr are probably 50% trolls, 49% attention seekers, and maybe one percent actual human shitheaps.


CAPTCHA: Miles to go. Appropriate maybe?

 

[RoonMian]

I'm old enough to remember a time when in my country people were burned alive just for being immigrants while ordinary citizens stood around and applauded.

Yet when I say that I believe that you cannot tolerate intolerance, that intolerance is not an opinion but a crime, that you have to speak out if you have a voice, that you have to stand up if you have a heart... Because I've seen on live TV people burning alive and jumping out of windows to save themselves... I get called a "Social Justice Warrior"...

In my eyes anyone who uses that insult unironically disqualifies himself.

 

[Erttheking]

....What the frak is that supposed to mean? Free will is an illusion? Uh, not it's not. You weren't predetermined by fate to type that out. You did it because you wanted to. I just...that claim of yours is not rooted in logic in anyway shape or form! It makes about as much sense as when batman said that "Punk is nothing but death, and crime, and the rage of a beast" It's trying to sound deep, but it means nothing.

I love how you immediately jump to "fate" because obviously thats the only thing that could back up my claims. The rest has already been said by others.

I can't do what makes me feel good. I don't have free will according to you. Therefore I can't. You see how nonsensical this is?

Stop the strawman m8, I never said anything of the sort. Its the other way round. You're bound to do things that "make you feel good".

When someone says something like that and doesn't specify what they mean my mind is going to go to places like that because, well, what else am I supposed to think? So which one do you subscribe two? The one where society forms us in certain ways (Which I'll admit is true but hardly completely cancels out free will) or the one where we can't have free will because that means we tap into the power of atoms (Which I don't buy at all)

Yes we are indeed bound to do things we enjoy, but the thing is that we can choose not to. I love nothing more than soda but I haven't been drinking it very much as of late because it's bad for me. Ergo I used my free will to stop myself from drinking more than one can a week.

Your point just seemed so...there. It just seemed baseless and needlessly nihilistic.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Although I can't speak for the UK, in the US there is mountains of evidence that the "wage gap" is, at best, statistical sleight of hand and, at worst, non-existent.

Spoiler: Links spoilered for length.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579483752909957472

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-biggest-myth-about-the-gender-wage-gap/276367/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/

Though I'm not going to subscribe to be able to read the WSJ article, the first two sources seem to be claiming that the wage gap simply isn't as large as was believed, and may be partway attributable to factors other than discrimination. That's very different from KingsGambit's bold claim that it definitely isn't there at all.

The point isn't whether it exists (pretty much all the authors agree it does) but why it exists. If you compare the salary of someone who works at McDonald's and someone who is a Petrochemical Engineer, even if they both work exactly 40 hours a week, there is going to be a significant "wage gap", but that doesn't mean the gap is morally wrong, unfair or the result of discrimination.

Likewise, as the articles and Dr. Farrell point out, the long-held use of the "wage gap" was to try and make the point of "women earn less money than men on average, therefore discrimination, sexism, patriarchy, etc.", when in fact numerous easily explainable and demonstrable factors show why and how the gap exists, and when factoring in the aforementioned reasons, any remaining effects that can be attributed (but almost never actually proven) to "discrimination" are, at best, extremely small.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Actually I ran this past a friend of mine who is good with science and he said that when it comes to this stuff and how the brain works, atoms don't matter at all. It all comes down to chemical reactions. I'm just gonna post what he said.

We can control the reactions by sheer belief, based primarily on physical actions associated with the belief, what we eat, where we are, who is around us, and if you want to put things in your intense, deep nerve stimulation technologies, the last of which directly influences how parts of the brain perform.

You can argue that the inherent reactions in our brain will determine if we will react in chemistry-changing ways, and how we change that chemistry based on outside input, but that's chaos theory, and proving that will take considerable effort.

 

[dragonswarrior]

AAaaaaahhhhhh... The OP is refreshing.

Good luck learning out there mate, don't forget to look for the intersections between sexism, racism, and classism. It's REALLY interconnected, and it's hard to fight against only one without accidentally sacrificing the others. So I would (from personal experience) recommend learning about and fighting against all of them. Just a tip.

 

[Silvanus]

The point isn't whether it exists (pretty much all the authors agree it does) but why it exists. If you compare the salary of someone who works at McDonald's and someone who is a Petrochemical Engineer, even if they both work exactly 40 hours a week, there is going to be a significant "wage gap", but that doesn't mean the gap is morally wrong, unfair or the result of discrimination.

Likewise, as the articles and Dr. Farrell point out, the long-held use of the "wage gap" was to try and make the point of "women earn less money than men on average, therefore discrimination, sexism, patriarchy, etc.", when in fact numerous easily explainable and demonstrable factors show why and how the gap exists, and when factoring in the aforementioned reasons, any remaining effects that can be attributed (but almost never actually proven) to "discrimination" are, at best, extremely small.

Putting it down entirely to job differences seems just as reductionist as putting it down entirely to discrimination, doesn't it?

A pretty good read about differences in pay within occupations can be found here [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/upshot/the-pay-gap-is-because-of-gender-not-jobs.html?_r=0]. More in-depth stuff is here [http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/goldin/files/goldin_aeapress_2014_1.pdf].

The Bureau of Labour Statistics also tracks earnings within job categories, rather than between them, and found a pay gap does exist [http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.pdf].

So, it really doesn't seem as if differences in employment trends between the sexes actually accounts for the pay gap. There's significant evidence that it exists within job categories, and in the same professions.

 

[Silvanus]

Feminists don't want equality they want special treatment, they want to censor things they don't personally like and complain.

I need some evidence to accept a claim about such a gigantic, diverse group of people.

 

[Twinrehz]

Skipping a bit of the reading here, because it's a bit too much for me to be patient enough to get to my point. And I also really just want to say this:

I have probably been sheltered from most of the gender inequality in my life, I sort of don't see it, even if I look. I don't look too well, though, I'm a bit of a social outcast, and other people generally don't interest me.

However, it does piss me off, to no small degree, when someone tries to reduce a person's standing by claiming the opinion is less relevant because it came from a woman. I can only reply to such statements with: So what? What difference does it make if it came from a man, a woman or an invertebrate? Even if the statement annoys you because it goes against what YOU believe in, there's no reason to start being unreasonable and attacking their person. It's not how discourse works, and if that's how you're going to react to it, then you have no place in the public room.

Perhaps someone can explain to me why this "civilized" society keeps maintaining its old fashioned ideas of lesser worth because of gender? Why women are treated like nothing more than "cum-dumpsters", to be taken advantage of and cast aside once you're done? That since they're "lesser beings", their feelings are not worth considering?

Why is it OK? In my mind, it's not OK. It's wrong to denigrate a person because of their opinions and their gender. I've never thought lesser about an advice because of the gender that gave me the advice.

If this post seems a bit confusing, it's because I'm having trouble collecting my thoughts properly.

 

[Erttheking]

Wow. Apparently this thread was so "influential", it caused someone to sign up (or make an alt account) to post two propaganda videos. Hmmm.

SJWs offend me so i'm trying to change their minds. It's obviously futile though, and if you change propaganda to common sense then yes. Maybe if you exposed yourself to opposing viewpoints instead of adhering to your insane ideology you wouldn't be so naive.

It's futile because the post you made directed at me only acknowledged a fifth of my post, took that fifth out of context and only served to insult me. With an approach like that, you're not gonna be changing anyone's mind.

 

[Flutterguy]

I think you're a bit too concerned and seeking definition in an already dead argument. Whatever leaves you with the impression you're doing good is always good and not just conceited self flattery. Right?

 

[Erttheking]

Your point just seemed so...there. It just seemed baseless and needlessly nihilistic.

Isn't that one of the challenges when you get anything more than knee deep into science and/or philosophy? Being able to accept your view of things was flawed or ill adjusted without going into denial because you lose all meaning?

As for baseless, well, sorry. You had a guy in this thread explain things to you over multiple posts in a better fashion than I can with my poor English. If you still think its baseless, nothing will change your mind.

Yes, but it helps if people explain how these things work when they say them as opposed to just leaving them hanging there. When I say "Needlessly nihilistic" I meant it sounded like it was just being nihilistic for the sake of being nihilistic. By all means challenge my viewpoints, I enjoy exploring philosophy, but to just say that out of nowhere without structuring it...it's jarring.

I still have no idea which guy you're talking about. The one who talked about how society conditioned us or the one who talked about how atoms affected how we think? Because if you're talking about the first I can see where you're coming from. The second...not so much

 

[Erttheking]

Feminists don't want equality they want special treatment, they want to censor things they don't personally like and complain.

I need some evidence to accept a claim about such a gigantic, diverse group of people.

Spoiler

We're seriously looking at Anita to represent feminism? Last time I checked even feminists on this website didn't like her very much.

 

[Silvanus]

Spoiler

Well, you've proven something about one feminist. What of the millions of others, including the majority who will have never even heard of Anita Sarkeesian?

 

[lacktheknack]

Feminism won decades ago and now all that's left of a once useful movement is moaning, whining and irrelevance. Feminism is an outdated dogma which, like sexism, are relics of the past.

Feminism has "won", the job is done?

Do you consider the pay gap, or the incidence of harassment and sexual assault to be of importance?

and you prove my point

That may be the most simplistic explanation I've seen today.

Is it true of people who support equality for other groups, too? I don't eat meat, so I suppose I'm just trying to get animals to like me so they'll go out with me.

Feminists don't want equality they want special treatment, they want to censor things they don't personally like and complain.

Then instead of ripping down feminism, why don't you spend time raising up egalitarianism? You know... actually offering proper alternatives? :/

 

[verdant monkai]

when comic book covers featuring 5 male Spider-Man variations including a goddamned PIG-MAN are all in powerful poses emitting strength, while the lone Spider-Girl is curled up in a T&A pose that makes her seem timid. This shit is everywhere and you can't stop seeing it. Which is why I fight.

Because I fight daily, in every action I take. I make sure that I try to walk behind every woman on the street in a way that does not make me seem a threat to them. Because as much as I don't think I am, I might be to her. My 6'2" 300 pound fat frame looks ridiculous in the mirror, but to a 5 foot and change slim woman walking down the street, I am quite possibly a potential monster. I try to educate my friends about this, and slowly they are starting to see it.

but my heart is in the right place...I hope.


There are a myriad of possible responses I am going to get for this post. I anticipate the hair-splitters, the semantic arguers, the outright name-callers and mod baiters, the ones who read the first paragraph and leaped at the chance to comment with smart arse responses, and the comedians too; I also hope to see some genuine support and maybe even a few people wondering if I might have a point.

It always kind of bothers me when anyone goes after someone else's art calling it sexist or socially poisonous or whatever. If you feel so strongly about this art then I suggest you take up comic book art and create your own safe for women covers. And I'd say the same to any girl offended by it, or anyone offended by any piece of art for that matter. If you don't like it and you think an altered version would make the world a better place, then bloody do it yourself.

The bit about walking behind women in the street is quite literally one of the creepiest things I've ever heard. Its just weird, no one gives a fuck about how you walk in front or behind them. They are too busy getting to where they are going to worry about you and how unthreatening you look. What do you do? please don't say you smile at them if they turn round.
I cant speak for everyone but I dont think most girls would appreciate this kind of obsessive behaviour. It's odd and makes you come off as the nice guy from Hell. It would also be very sexist if you didn't do the same for men, as you are treating the two groups differently.

I honestly think your heart is in the right place and you are trying to be a good guy. But tone it down a bit bro.

I dont know which of these categories you will stick me in but I'm afraid I don't support you or think you have much of a point. You're post however was an interesting read.

I think men and women should have equal rights and pay and all that, but I wouldn't consider myself a feminist activist, women are quite capable of fighting their own battles. I would say I dislike feminism as it leads mostly to misandry and the belief that women should have special privileges, which is not equality.
To bring this back to gaming, sorry if I sound harsh but if some women feel that various games are sexist and need changing, they can fuck off. Games are art and the artist should be allowed free artistic reign, censorship is bad for culture and entertainment in general. If women feel unrepresented and objectified, then women need to make games and comics that represent them well. not muscle in on everyone else's stuff. The way to change a system is to do it legitimately and with the system, not rage and demand against it.

 

[lacktheknack]

Then instead of ripping down feminism, why don't you spend time raising up egalitarianism? You know... actually offering proper alternatives? :/

I think his viewpoint is we don't really need any alternatives, we're fine without feminism full stop.

Spoiler

STANNIS STANNIS STANNIS

The post he quoted asked:

Do you consider the pay gap, or the incidence of harassment and sexual assault to be of importance?

... which he entirely avoided answering.

I'm assuming he cares about these things a bit, like most pleasant people would, but just didn't think to answer.

 

[JediMB]

There are a myriad of possible responses I am going to get for this post. I anticipate the hair-splitters, the semantic arguers, the outright name-callers and mod baiters, the ones who read the first paragraph and leaped at the chance to comment with smart arse responses, and the comedians too; I also hope to see some genuine support and maybe even a few people wondering if I might have a point.

Here's my response:

You have my utmost respect. Our views seem to largely align, although I personally identify as some manner of radical feminist. I'm not even sure how that happened, but yeah... once I saw it I couldn't unsee it. Three or four years ago I started to get more involved in "LGB" issues, and since then I've complemented that with the "T" and the "Q" and gone from a generic feminist to radical. I've learned a lot in the last few years, but of course there's plenty more I'm still ignorant about.

Hell, I don't even know who I am.

 

[teamcharlie]

So you wanted to make a long post explaining the rationale behind your feminist activism, got the negative feedback you expected, then apparently didn't actually want to talk about it after the first page or so. I think I expected more fight from a 'Why I Fight' topic.

Anyway. Sexism sucks. Good luck with the war, I guess?