Ok, I apologize to GeorgiaAmy. Now that I've read selected posts later in this thread, I'm beginning to like this "babe".
According to the Census Bureaus 2009 American Community Survey, women comprise 48 percent of the U.S. workforce but just 24 percent of workers in STEM fields. Half as many women are working in STEM jobs as would be expected if gender representation in STEM professions mirrored the overall workforce. This underrepresentation has remained fairly consistent over the past decade, even as womens share of the college-educated workforce has increased. Among STEM jobs, womens representation has varied over time. While the percentage of women has declined in computer and math jobs, their percentage has risen in other occupations. In 2009, women comprised 27 percent of the computer and math workforce (the largest of the four STEM components), a drop of 3 percentage points since 2000. Engineers are the second largest STEM occupational group, but only about one out of every seven engineers is female.[9] Men are much more likely than women to have a STEM career regardless of educational attainment. Beede, David, Tiffany Julian, David Langdon, George McKittrick, Beethika Khan, and Mark Doms. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administrations. www.esa.doc.gov. "Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to
you have no evidence for the above assertion .. even the studies you cite say that there is a percentage wage gap that cannot be accounted for in ANY models used, some of the authors of those studies simply assume that it is not discrimination .. that is an assumption without facts or evidence.
Well I think I am the one who knows what it means and you the one who is confused. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reproduce a : to produce (new individuals of the same kind) by a sexual or asexual process Now cite the law the right wants to pass to restrict women from reproducing. Or address the ever present need for the right to engage in phony semantical dances to avoid discussing what they REALLY support, the killing of babies in the womb and granting a mother the "right" to do so. If you can show me a dictionary which states that reproduce means to kill your baby please post the link.
That is not an assumption, the assumption is that it IS because of discrimination even though there is no evidence to support it.
The assumption works both ways, there is no evidence that it is discrimination, just as there is no evidence it is not .. hence why, unlike the author, I do not assert it is due to discrimination or not just that it could be .. both are equal in merit as a reason.
No it doesn't, if no evidence exist no evidence exist. Studies are there to PROVE something, if it is not proved and you still believe it then YOU are doing the assuming. So taking this study that showed all but 5% of the 22% disparate outcome was directly attributed to life choices made, that the other could not be assigned to anything, and making the leap in logic that it must be discrimination therefore we need to do something about it legally is folly. That is pure assumption. Saying it could not be attributed to discrimination is fact, therefore we do not need some government program or intervention.
for one I have not stated that it is proved one way or another, so yet again another assumption on your part. again where have I stated it must be discrimination, all I have said is that it is just a likely to be discrimination as it is to be anything else .. prove me wrong.
Do you know what multivariate regression analysis is??? Do you understand how it works??? You really have to have the intellectual horsepower to understand mutivariate regression analysis and how it works to understand why those researchers couldn't account for that 5% in their model.
A HA. 'Course I knew that was wrong, just wanted to see if you were watching. The old "post something completely idiotic to see who's watching" trick. Works every time.
I understand it. The simply question is can the researchers account for the 5% variation by any method used .. if not then the fact it could be due to discrimination is as valid as any other conclusion and until such time that conclusion is shown to be incorrect it remains a possibility for the variation.
Maybe you missed my whole point. Either gender in the US can choose any path. Gender no longer makes any possibility unattainable in the US. Differences in gender exist and always will and that creates trends. Regarding domestic violence, I think....happens once, shame on you...happens twice, shame on me....gender doesn't matter. Describe your personal observations of discrimination in Washington.
As an egalitarian, I believe both genders should be equally accountable for the consequences of their actions and choices. However when women commit the same crimes as men they recieve 63% reduced sentences and that's after being many times less likely to be prosecuted in the first place when they're arrested. That's not accountability. Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases Sonja B. Starr University of Michigan Law School August 29, 2012 University of Michigan Law and Economics Research Paper, No. 12-018 Abstract: This paper assesses gender disparities in federal criminal cases. It finds large gender gaps favoring women throughout the sentence length distribution (averaging over 60%), conditional on arrest offense, criminal history, and other pre-charge observablesc. Prior studies have reported much smaller sentence gaps because they have ignored the role of charging, plea-bargaining, and sentencing fact-finding in producing sentences. Most studies control for endogenous severity measures that result from these earlier discretionary processes and use samples that have been winnowed by them. I avoid these problems by using a linked dataset tracing cases from arrest through sentencing. Using decomposition methods, I show that most sentence disparity arises from decisions at the earlier stages, and use the rich data to investigate causal theories for these gender gaps. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002
As an egalitarian I believe male suffering should be seen as equally important as female suffering, however............ Is Female suffering seen as more important than male suffering. It is isn’t it? Even as babies, it seems female suffering is seen as more important than male suffering. For example, this study found that parents take longer to pick up baby boys than baby girls when they cry: Goldberg and Lewis "Play Behaviour in the Year-old Infant: Early Sex differences" Abstract at: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1127152 And then there are events like the media uproar when 276 school girls were kidnapped by the islamic Terrorist Group boko harem. The kidnapping of the 276 predominantly Christian schoolgirls by Islamic terror group Boko Haram is an atrocity, but it is not the first atrocity they have committed. It is just the first one to trip the West’s interest switch. A girl’s right to an education has become an important pillar in western ideology, and an important pawn in the battle against radical Islam. It is why Malala has seen herself elevated to an almost saint-like position. The recent kidnappings have enraged western sensibilities, because they desecrate hallowed ideas about female equality. The West has responded in the only way it knows how: a self-righteous selfie protest using the hashtag ‘Bring Back Our Girls’. Michelle Obama, Cara Delevingne, Jessica Biel and Anne Hathaway have all involved themselves in it. But Boko Haram – whose name means ‘western education is sinful’ – does not distinguish between the education of girls and boys. In February, the group attacked another school. After boarding up every exit, its men seized 59 boys and gunned them down or cut their throats with machetes. Some buildings were sealed up and set alight. The girls were ordered to go home, abandon their ‘wicked’ schooling and seek husbands. There was no protest for the boys. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeeh...-protest-then/ And then there’s the fact that women attempt suicide three times more often than men, yet men commit suicide five times more often than women. http://mentalhealthrealities.blogspo...tween-men.html What accounts for this discrepancy. I believe men are more motivated to actually be successful when it comes to suicide because men know there won’t be any sympathy for them if they fail and women have an attempted suicide rate three times greater than men but fail to succeed four times as often because they know people will be sympathetic towards their suffering when they fail. Then there's cancer. Men get similar rates of prostate cancer as women get breast, yet breast cancer gets twice as much funding as prostate cancer. '''''This year 218,890 men in the U.S. will be diagnosed with prostate cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. By comparison, 178,480 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed in women. Not a huge difference, but a new report finds that for every prostate cancer drug on the market, there are seven used to treat breast cancer, and federal spending on breast cancer research outpaces prostate cancer spending by a ratio of nearly two to one.''''' http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories...siness-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice As an egalitarian, I believe the suffering of males should be seen as equally important as the suffering of females.
Haha... I'd trust a male to fix my roof, car, build a deck...I'd never have dropped my kids off with a male preschool teacher and I'd be much more likely to pull over to help a stranded female than male. Pretending everyone is the same is... So odd to me.
The explanation is very simple...Women are less threatening and less violent than men overall. That is a fact that experience and observation confirms over and over. They are seen as less threatening overall and as such get lighter sentencing than men. Most people like the gender variations and find them complimentary.
Both Traditionalists and Feminists are in opposition to Egalitarians. The difference between Traditionalists, Feminists, and Egalitarians is: Traditionalists believe women should be on a pedastal and they call the pedastal a pedastal, Feminists believe women should be on a pedastal too but they call the pedastal equality, and egalitarians actually believe in equality. Of course Feminists also hate men and children and all feminists believe women are superior to men.
I'm sure during slavery the slave holders shared a similar lack of interest in matters concerning equality.
White males are the only race and gender combination that have laws that actively discriminate against them today based on nothing more than their race and gender. - - - Updated - - - So your saying slave holders were concerned with equality???
- - - Updated - - - I misread the slavery question. If you're oppressed, go fight for your freedom. Or go cry and knit a bootie or pour yourself some Zinfandel.
