Is that about the state of things?

You’re trying too hard.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJOlIm5_wGs[/video]

That’s the marker we should be trying to understand and the Fawcett Society this morning said that the main problem is that more women are self selecting out of higher paying roles in order to manage child care and that the reason women do that, is because men are discouraged from doing it and discriminated against with things like SMP/SSP imbalances.

Or are women doing this because they get paid less than men so it would make more sense for the person with the higher earning potential to be the main breadwinner and the one with less earning potential to do the childcare and domestic duties?

That’s the marker we should be trying to understand and the Fawcett Society this morning said that the main problem is that more women are self selecting out of higher paying roles in order to manage child care and that the reason women do that, is because men are discouraged from doing it and discriminated against with things like SMP/SSP imbalances.

Thinking about this at work earlier and looking at those people in the highest paid executive roles – the ones that women aspire to gender equality wise. In my place they are overwhelmingly male (75% ish). They are also for the most part selfish, ruthless, backstabbing arseholes (male and female) and almost all are married with children or divorced. I would guess that due to the hours they put in and their attitude to others, someone, either their partner or hired help, are doing most if not all of the work at home.

Thinking about the males further, I am almost certain they would all choose their career over being there for their family. I am almost certain they would not have started nor wanted a family in the first place if they knew it would interfere with their career.

Out of all those roles, as a ratio, more of the women than the men don’t have children. By a large margin (about 3 out of 5 of the women don’t compared to maybe 1 out of 5 of the men). I don’t think that the men are discouraged from taking time off to share the parenting responsibilities, I just think at that level, their entire life is their career and they just don’t want to.

I honestly don’t think women as a whole would be prepared to make these same ‘sacrifices’ as the men are as their need/want to have children proves greater than their need/want to be at the top of the corporate ladder. The women that do make those ‘sacrifices’ (ie not having children) are not held back in the slightest. I am not sure I have a problem with the fact that women who want both a good family life and to be at the top of their career cannot do so. If they can find a partner who is willing to take on the main role at home, allowing them to remain at the top at work, then good for them but let’s face it women are much more unlikely to marry ‘down’ to that level where she would be a high flyer but her partner is sufficiently low flying that his career means less to him than his family. Hell, I’ll bet many men would jump at that chance should it arise.

Or are women doing this because they get paid less than men so it would make more sense for the person with the higher earning potential to be the main breadwinner and the one with less earning potential to do the childcare and domestic duties?

Yes I think that was always what people assumed and based on the possibility that the pay differential was as high as 18% (a popular trope in the past), that conclusion would appear valid.

The problem is that the data, while oddly inconsistent across the two sets of ONS figures I’ve seen, still doesn’t back it up.

The data clearly shows us that at the time most people are having children the difference is only about 2.2%. In actual monetary terms, for people in that age bracket the net difference is likely to be something like £300 a year.

There’s just no way that a decision that far reaching, with so many other variables in play can be accounted for by that difference.

There are clearly pressures on both sides, I am convinced that those pressures are gendered in nature and we should really try to work those out but I’m not buying the pay differential as being a material reason.

Well I keep hearing stories that older women become ‘invisible’. I’m not going to let that happen without a fight! Starting with my promise to myself that I will never wear beige! And not becoming invisible at work or in my bike either.

geetee. would you like some pointers to stuff that helps you understand gender privilege?

vickypea

Warning

When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves
And satin sandals, and say we’ve no money for butter.
I shall sit down on the pavement when I’m tired
And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells
And run my stick along the public railings
And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
And pick flowers in other people’s gardens
And learn to spit.

You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat
And eat three pounds of sausages at a go
Or only bread and pickle for a week
And hoard pens and pencils and beermats and things in boxes.

But now we must have clothes that keep us dry
And pay our rent and not swear in the street
And set a good example for the children.
We must have friends to dinner and read the papers.

But maybe I ought to practise a little now?
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.

Jenny Joseph

The data clearly shows us that at the time most people are having children the difference is only about 2.2%.

The difference between what? Between husbands and wives, or between men and women doing the same job?

or between work of equal value?

The difference between what? Between husbands and wives, or between men and women doing the same job?

2.2% is the median difference between all men and all women aged between 20 and 29 in full time work.

If you’re going to try and use the difference to try and explain why women might end up self selecting out of the work force having had children (where the dicussion between them is based simply on who earns more), then you can apply that difference as an average across all couples. There will clearly be some for whom the difference is much larger, but that could also be in favour of the woman.

Ignoring the fact that there is a second set of data from the ONS that shows this difference to be just 0.8% (I think because this data set excludes over time payments), that 2.2% translates into a net difference of about £350 a year.

This is all work; not work of equal value, not people in the same jobs.

We’ve already seen evidence to support the idea that the difference for people in the exact same role is a small as 1.6%.

The material differenceds in pay only emerge after 40 and, again, those reasons are important and should be explored.

geetee. would you like some pointers to stuff that helps you understand gender privilege?

No but thanks, but keep banging that trope if it makes you feel better. I deny it exists entirely but I respect your position is different.

Well I keep hearing stories that older women become ‘invisible’.

Well they are definitely under represented in senior positions; that is unequivocal. The question is why and why does that happen only after 40.

There’s an interesting perspective on that from my good Dr. Peterson:

[video]https://youtu.be/HaQGN7A_fNs?t=83[/video]

Now i know he is like satan to some of you and I am not saying that this explanation covers 100% of all cases, but it is worth listening to and I know many instances where what he says is true, with my own wife being one of them.

geetee – the reason you deny it exists is due to a lack of knowledge and experience IMO. If you want to understand then you need more knowledge.

You are looking at this from a privileged position. But you don’t understand your position is privileged therefore you can’t see the barriers to those who are not in your privileged position

It was a genuine offer to help you understand an issue you clearly don’t. understand.

Geetee – is it possible that the data only represents a society “in transit”, that the pay differential is already disappearing and that we just need it to grow through? It’ll certainly still be the case that some/many couples are making employment decisions based on that 18% figure.

^ we already discussed that possibility several pages ago!

Actually been good to read this thread, different perspectives coming through without the usual slagging kicking off! My small contribution:

From the small sample group of my friends (aged between 30 and 40) who have had to make the decision on one of them dropping work days it’s been the women who are earning more than the men by quite a large margin. Out of 5 couples only one has had the man earning more and that was only just! Looking at my workplace the three highest paid jobs are done by women too. Could just be inside my personal bubble but it does seem that pay equality is happening in a lot of cases. I do worry that it may go too far though as I have one or two female friends who struggle to find partners who are their equal in regards to earning potential. I do get the feeling that the statistics have a habit of hiding things and muddying the picture on the whole wage gap issue though.

The issue that does need addressing is what vickypea has mentioned: women ‘disappearing’ as they age. Don’t know how you’d fix that one really as it’s more a state of mind influenced by social norms and advertising so it would require the individual to want to change first, this could then drive the other stuff in the right direction.

I do worry that it may go too far though as I have one or two female friends who struggle to find partners who are their equal in regards to earning potential.

Why on earth would that be a criteria for finding a partner?

… pay equality is happening in a lot of cases. I do worry that it may go too far though as I have one or two female friends who struggle to find partners who are their equal in regards to earning potential.

Curious. Equality of pay leading to gender disparity in earning potential?

Yes but some dont want to hear and some have their own agenda and some seem to think they can change this posters view with facts.

I am not sure how many threads they will require to alter this view but its the only one capable of being moved by the facts.

Mrs TJ and I have no kids and have been together 37 years. Sometimes she has earned more than me. Sometimes I have earned more than her. Neither of us give a hoot.

Partnership of equals

kilo – I don’t get it either but they say it’s to do with equal status socially and financially with regards to mortgage payments, holidays etc. Guess they don’t want to be taken for being a meal ticket by some layabout bloke!

IMHO anyone who puts money in their lists of wants for falling in love has a suspect moral compass.

I know quite a few couples where the woman earns substantially more than the male, me included, all happy and content. Mad attitude imho.

There’s an interesting perspective on that from my good Dr. Peterson:

Interesting that you solely use this guy as your “go to expert”.

Note the source. I have a little bet with myself about the reaction to this post.

Whatever the source this seems to me to be a reasonable starting point to understand what gender privilege is

160+ Examples of Male Privilege in All Areas of Life

Also google “glass ceiling”

This is a key point “But here’s the thing about male privilege: it hurts everyone, including you. This is because accessing male privilege often requires you to conform to a toxic norm of masculinity.”

Ie big boys don’t cry

Why on earth would that be a criteria for finding a partner?

I’ve read, but cannot cite the source so take it as you wish, that women typically look for someone of equal or higher social status. I don’t know why. I can’t prove it’s true. Money doesn’t always equal social status and vice versa but it’s a reasonable approximation.

^ we already discussed that possibility several pages ago!

We did. I agreed with your suggestion.

geetee – the reason you deny it exists is due to a lack of knowledge and experience IMO. If you want to understand then you need more knowledge.

That argument applies just as equally to your perspective. We’ve lived our lives, I’m 45 and have a decent amount of life experience so either both our perspectives are equally valid or else your suggesting some additional learning has given your view the edge?

Geetee – is it possible that the data only represents a society “in transit”, that the pay differential is already disappearing and that we just need it to grow through? It’ll certainly still be the case that some/many couples are making employment decisions based on that 18% figure.

As Vickypea pointed out this is a strong possibility. And yes there will be some couples where there is an 18% difference but that’s not what the big picture data tells us. It shows us that across the entire population in full time work, the difference at age 20-40 is about 2.2%.

The point is that that’s not much of a difference, it certainly wouldn’t bother me even if that difference existed between myself and my colleagues doing the same job. I’d just shrug and get on with it.

Geetee. Gender privilege is a well known phenomenon. The way you deny it and attempt to justify your denial shows a lack of knowledge IMO

Take the parallel with climate change. the overwhelming weight of evidence shows man made climate change is real. Some folk still deny it – why? Same as Evolution.

On gender privilege the overwhelming weight of evidence shows this to be real.

I base my views on what the evidence shows. This is not comparable to your position which is basing your argument on what you “know” and then cherry picking evidence to suit. this is what creationists and climate change deniers do.

Your position and mine are not comparable Mine is based on the overwhelming weight of evidence.

I offer to help you understand. You reject this offer. did you even open the link?

I do worry that it may go too far though as I have one or two female friends who struggle to find partners who are their equal in regards to earning potential.

Why on earth would that be a criteria for finding a partner? [/quote]Studies have shown that women take into account their partners financial status more than men do when choosing a long term partner. Historically that could have mostly been down to gender inequality where woman were more likely to rely on their male partner for financial support. As society has become more equal it has been shown that financial status becomes less relevent and that similar traits are sought by both women and men. However, it has also been shown that the more successful a woman becomes through both education and career then their pool of potential partners decreases. For men this is the opposite, the more their status increases the wider a pool they have.

I’d just shrug and get on with it.

Aye if a women did better than men on all things by that percentage work, holidays etc you would indeed just shrug your shoulders and not at all see it as inequity. You are deluded and to seem to be self deluded in what you claim you would do.

Interesting that you solely use this guy as your “go to expert”.

Because there are not meany MRA idiots in science is my guess.

Can I just repeat this quote from him as its hilarious- as if using a term that they wish to be referred by is akin to a pogrom. He is **** nuts. Anyone who cites this deranged loon really should have a word with themself.

I will never use words I hate, like the trendy and artificially constructed words “zhe” and “zher.” These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century.
I have been studying authoritarianism on the right and the left for 35 years. I wrote a book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, on the topic, which explores how ideologies hijack language and belief. As a result of my studies, I have come to believe that Marxism is a murderous ideology. I believe its practitioners in modern universities should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to promote such vicious, untenable and anti-human ideas, and for indoctrinating their students with these beliefs. I am therefore not going to mouth Marxist words. That would make me a puppet of the radical left, and that is not going to happen. Period.[35]

I offer to help you understand. You reject this offer. did you even open the link?

I’ve read that link before. It’s turkeys drawing up a list of reasons why christmas should be abolished. It’s a list of ‘grievances’ that the author has imagined and suggested and which I am sure there are a lot of people who would agree with them. But then there are lots of people who agree with things like MGTOW and MRA and for the love of god look who got elected in the US! Besides, there are very few things on that list that could be either demonstrated empirically, or, and this is far worse, disproven (and we’re back to the key criticism that Karl Popper made about Marxism which is that is resists entirely the notion of falsification).

But for what it’s worth, there’s nothing on that list that I deny happens at some point some where. I am sure all of those things have been true at some point. But to suggest they are always true, or true in the overwhelming number of situaitons, at least in the UK, is nonsense.

I think the problem with the idea of ‘white male priviledge’ though isn’t what it means or how it’s defined, it’s what kind of behaviour and attitude it endgenders when people start to apply it to real people at an individual level. It engenders a biggoted view; ‘your white, male, straight and middle class’ ergo, you’re priviledged.

If it stopped there it might not be so bad but it typically doesn’t. Those that make this argument feel it would be right to impose some form of social sanction on someone as a result.

My issue isn’t that there aren’t people for whom life has been a much easier ride and that, I guess for want of a better expression and in contrast to someone else, might be regarded as having had a priviledged experience.

My issue is automatically assuming that based on otherwise arbitrary characteristics even if at a big picture level, there seems to be a trend. If you take every individual as you find them and only judge them on their individual merits, I don’t have a problem with you reaching the conclusion of privilege.

By the way I wasn’t born into a middle class family, I suffered horendous child abuse and it would appear I’m not exactly straight so can you tell me my own personal level of privilege?

Bingo. I knew that would be the response 😉

But for what it’s worth, there’s nothing on that list that I deny happens at some point some where. I am sure all of those things have been true at some point.

that is gender privilege in a nutshell

But to suggest they are always true, or true in the overwhelming number of situaitons, at least in the UK, is nonsense.

this is the failure in your point. NO one claims this.

By the way I wasn’t born into a middle class family, I suffered horendous child abuse and it would appear I’m not exactly straight so can you tell me my own personal level of privilege?

This quote from that page that you dismiss so eily because it does not fir your preconceptions states this clearly

Examples of male privilege demonstrate how the patriarchy shows up – but they aren’t representations of every man’s life, at every moment.] They aren’t things that only men have ever experienced.

It’s just more likely that you’ll get these benefits if you’re a man, because they’re supported by the system of patriarchy.

And since patriarchy doesn’t exist in a vacuum, there are other systems of oppression that affect different men differently. A man walking alone at night generally has the privilege of not being targeted for gender-based violence.

But a man of color may have to worry about being targeted for racist violence. A mentally ill man could be targeted for police brutality. A gay man could be the target of homophobic violence.

These examples don’t invalidate the existence of male privilege, which are benefits denied to people who aren’t men due to their gender. But they show why the context of intersectionality (how different forms of systemic oppression intersect) matters.

I have a little bet with myself about the reaction to this post.

Did you wager that most people would think it was bollocks?

Note the source.

I certainly did. The website references itself as proof. 😆

“I’m right, and the proof is that I’m right”

As a side note, I can imagine how you’ll reply. 😉

Geetee – please note none of my posts are meant as a personal attack on you. More an attempt to explain and help. Perhaps clumsy in wording and I do get exasperated but my intentions were of the best.

I offer to help you understand.

And again

Geetee – please note none of my posts are meant as a personal attack on you. More an attempt to explain and help

All hail the Messiah

TJ – out of interest do you have any views on the conflict between transgender rights and feminism?

Geetee – please note none of my posts are meant as a personal attack on you. More an attempt to explain and help. Perhaps clumsy in wording and I do get exasperated but my intentions were of the best.

I don’t take it like that. We might not always agree but I’ve never taken anything you’ve said (ever) as being anything other than the thoughts of a fundamentally decent human human being who means well. I always did like you (before the ban I mean) and Still do. I just don’t always agree with you.

sound. thanks

rene59 – Member

TJ – out of interest do you have any views on the conflict between transgender rights and feminism?

Damn you – I was going to walk from this thread!

Transgender issues I have real difficulty with. Its so far from my own experience that I can have no understanding really of them. Some discussions on line with folk have given me a glimmer of light but do I understand transgender issues? No

I take it you mean Greer? I understand her position and believe it to have some merit. ( and believe that she was quoted without context to some extent) I can also see why to transgender folk it would be incredibly frustrating and offensive.

so given my lack of knowledge and thus lack of ability to empathise its a debate I keep out of. I’ll be guided by ” best practice” and the discussions I have had with the transgender person I know a little bit ie people have the right to self identify, I should respect that

I take it you mean Greer?

My best friend is currently recovering in Thailand from her second round of surgery (first was facial reconstruction, second is, well you know…)

She happens to think Germain Greer has a point, which is interesting.

I take it you mean Greer?

Not just Greer but yes her and many others. It seems to me that for the younger generation transgender activism and feminism has somewhat rolled into one and that a lot of older more traditional feminist women (and women in general) feel under attack and unable to speak out about how they feel about certain issues. There is a lot of conflict in beliefs. Transgender women competing in female sports, people who were born male but identify as female being given access to female spaces and services, people born male and lived most their life as male being given female awards, transgender women being convicted of rape and these crimes being recorded against women. Many different issues that are not really able to be discussed in the open without fear of repercussions but could have a major impact on womens lives. I was just curious if you had ever explored this subject and what conclusions, if any, you had made.