The Hot New Thing In The Democratic Party: White Men

The gender pay gap is a misleading statistic. The left claims its a measure of gender discrimination in the work place. It is no such thing. Women take time off to raise children and they also make different career choices.
The gender mix in the senate or any other elected body is up to the voters.

 

Whites barely outnumber non-whites in the democratic party. Does that give white males a disadvantage? I'm not sure. But here is an old article that breaks down the Democratic Party by state, percentage of non-white and white Democrats.

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/cr...ts-2016-the-primary-map-still-favors-clinton/

There's no doubt black democrats were decisive in Obama winning the nomination in 2008 and Hillary winning it in 2016. A lot of people don't know that Sanders won the white vote, abet by a slim margin whereas Hillary trounced Sanders in the black vote giving her the nomination.

 

The above assumes that such can actually be done, and operates on the basis that it is something that simply must be done. Why exactly is it something that must be done? Why is it something regarded as being of actual importance? What ultimate, meaningful difference, is actually made in the matter?

 

Yes, up to voters, who practice favoring males over females when considering candidates to vote for.

 

Perhaps you'll understand better when you have to reincarnate as a female.

 

Meaning that it is not actually possible for yourself to provide an answer to the question presented to yourself.

 

What do you want to do, force voters to elect women?

 

No, it means simply that if you don't value gender equality, nothing I can say will change that. You will have to experience gender inequality for yourself from the side left out before you'll be open to the idea of promoting gender equality.

 

No, I don't want to FORCE anyone to do anything. But in a nation that has historically prided itself for being the first nation in world history to claim human rights as a God-given thing, it makes sense that we practice what we feel so proud about preaching. Otherwise, we're just the latest in a long series of nationalist hypocrites.

 

Which does nothing to even begin answering the question. Why exactly is it something that must be done? Why is it something regarded as being of actual importance? What ultimate, meaningful difference, is actually made in the matter?

 

It's all tied to a thing called human rights & equality for ALL HUMANS under the law. Our current system doesn't honor that ideal.

 

Women have the same rights as men in this country. Nobody has the right to hold public office, only the right to run for public office. What exactly do you think we ought to be "practicing" that we are not doing now?

 

Men and women are different in many ways and therefore not equal in every respect. The sexes are equal before the law in this country. To attempt to make them equal in all ways is like trying to force round pegs into square holes. Why should we try to do such a thing?

 

I'm not saying men & women are, or should be, the "same" as each other in every way. I'm saying we as a society should value them equally & give them equal rights as human beings under the law. I'm saying we should pay them equal pay for equal work, and offer them equal opportunities in employment or on the job promotions. We should recognize & respond to the special needs of pregnant women on the job, never forgetting for every pregnancy there's a participating male. I'm not saying men & women are equal in every way, any more than we can say any two women are exactly equal in every way, or any two males are equal in every way. I appreciate our differences. But we must all be valued the same under the law. And, there's plenty of evidence out there indicating we aren't valued the same now.

 

None of which has anything to do with the original point being addressed. That being the question of women being accepted as national and international leaders. Equality under the law has absolutely nothing to do with being accepted at the national and international levels, as there is no constitutional right to be a leader at any level. A leader is someone who is best qualified to be in that position, and who is both accepted and respected by those who will be lead. Donald Trump is a fine example of such, being a male individual, but who is simultaneously subject to much scorn and disrespect despite being the gender that has historically been leaders throughout history.

Being recognized and accepted as a leader means making it there without outside assistance or help that suggests to the public the individual in question could never have made it there on their own. Such requires an end to affirmative action and other similar programs that promote the unqualified in the name of diversity, and requires individuals to benefit on their own merits alone. If an individual cannot get into a particular position on their own qualifications, then they simply have no business being in that position in the first place. It is simply how the real world works, no matter how much one may dislike hearing such.

Bias is not something that can be bred out of humanity. It is simply not possible. One will always be biased one way or another, and that bias will always drive their decisions, even at the subconscious level. If one is not biased in favor of males, they are biased against males, with both being equally bad.

 

I don't think the government should be dictating to employers who they need to hire, how much they need to pay them, and who they need to promote. It is up to them to determine the "value" of an employee based on their performance. I don't see women being undervalued. Many women who work in nice comfortable offices make more money than men who work at hard labor in harsh conditions. If an employer could hire women for less money to do a job just as well as men why would he hire any men?

 

So you believe it's impossible for anyone to be gender bias free? One can't feel equal toward either gender? I disagree.

 

Nonetheless, the statistics say women in America overall, earn about 0.70 for every dollar a male earns in the same job. I think that speaks for itself.

 

Correct.

Correct.

Disagreement does not change matters of facts or truth, however. Disagreement is merely a statement of belief, no different than one claiming to prefer peach ice cream compared to hazel nut.

 

Do both parties possess the exact same level and degrees of training and experience when compared to one another, however? Have both invested the exact same amount of time in attaining a specific level of employment?

 

Shouldn't you be voting for the best candidate instead of voting for one sex over another? So much for meritocracy and our evolution.

 

Indeed.

 

That statistic is not a "same job" statistic. It is the average of all men compared to the average of all women. It is very misleading and dishonest to use it as a measure of discrimination against women.

 

So? Maybe they take more sick days or pregnancy leave. Maybe they don't work as much overtime. Who knows. At any rate, I don't buy it. Sounds like more feminist poor mouthing and sand bagging to me. Women get more and better in almost everything than do men, while men do the heavy lifting and dying. The greatest inequities between the genders is in divorce courts where men almost always get greatly shorted.

 

You are supporting everything against your own interests. All of it just to be seen as politically correct. How sad. You apparently don't care about the issues, just how cool you will look in the eyes of the radicals within your party...