Did you just try to tie domestic violence to monetary compensation at a workplace? How is any business responsible for the actions of the woman’s partner?
Blatantly and openly sexist. First and second wave feminists must be rolling in their graves over such blatant betrayal of their legacy.
Openly anticompetitive. How do you expect any business would hire women if they cost more without some sort of … what’s the phrase… seizing the means of production and compelling the kulaks to pay the women more?
Advocating that people don’t discriminate or prejudice themselves over race is not the same as pretending it doesn’t exist.
I could name all sorts of risk differences in both directions between genders. But attempting to force everyone into a precisely identical grey blandness isn’t justice, and has nothing to do with fair market compensation for services rendered anyway.
Or I could be more socialist - leaning. I’m not advocating for_exact_ same levels of compensation across the board, but I do support basic income and measures to even the current inequalities. Which still exist and still favour white males over all other demographics, in a variety of different ways, and discount many forms of labour which are currently unpaid or underpaid.
How is that any more sexist than saying "the work men do is more valuable/important/dangerous, that is why they get paid more for it?
I’m just trying to point out the inconsistency of thinking here, and the lack of recognition of the social importance and value of unpaid work, which women do far more of than men. I’m saying we should value more than the current _over_valued roles that men tend to hold currently. How is that sexist?
You openly advocate discrimination and unequal pay based on gender. You openly blame individual differences in pay on race and gender over anything else. And yet you claim that you’re not being sexist.
That sound I’m hearing is the English language being tortured to the point that it violates the Geneva Conventions.
Not sure why you are quoting that, because it’s not what I said.
What I said was that men choose to do the work that is more valuable/important/dangerous, because it pays better. These things pay better because otherwise nobody would do them, not because men happen to choose them.
I don’t think you have any clue about the relative cost of these choices. Worldwide there are 107 men born for every 100 women, by age 65 there are 78 men for every 100 women, in countries like the USA & UK, its even worse, with 75/76 men for every 100 women. I can’t quickly find the numbers for Australia, but I expect they are around the USA/UK levels.
Just the direct workplace deaths in Australia are 4 times the national domestic violence levels, at about 4 per week, never mind the male suicide rate at around 40 per week. Yes - 40 PER WEEK in Australia, and it barely rates a mention here.
That is saddening. What is downright frightening is the fact that you’ll probably be marked a MRA for even knowing these statistics and thinking them important (not necessarily by any participant in this thread but by mainstream social justice opinions and advocates).
Yeah, I was not implying that, sorry if it was not very clear. Merely that other people might do that to downplay the value of the very important statistics you outlined.
I’m closing this thread. Technically, this should never have been a topic to begin with, as the circumstances are too sensitive and perverts the course of justice, and the participation has devolved into crap.
@PotentialPirate: You’re creating shitstorm after shitstorm on this forum, and your name on here suggests at at-a-glance value that you’re still a fence-sitter and therefore giving us a bad reputation without yourself being a recognisable member. If you are a member, change your screen name to be less suggestive of procrastination.
If anyone thinks this thread should be re-opened, petition to the National Council for review.