<p>Have you ever noticed how PC we've become in this society? How much there is that we shouldn't say, or shouldn't do? I guess this goes for women, but it goes for men too.</p>
<p>I've been thinking about this for awhile. It seems like we -- society -- spend a lot of time trying to not offend and hurt the feelings of women. It seems like the double standard here is if you are a man and you have a dissenting opinion, especially about gender itself, you have to worry about a label of some sort. </p>
<p>It's like, women are always offended by something or another. If it's not something that reinforces an accepted traditional gender role (i.e. man should pay), they are "offended". If it's not something that reinforces modern feminist thought (i.e. women should make the same amount of money as men), they get offended.</p>
<p>What's confusing to me is, if women are offended anyway, why do we spend so much time trying to make sure they aren't?</p>
<p>lol i knoww what you mean, the other day (i forgot how it came up)I was saying how girls in general are not physically suited to play competitively in football (our football team in context[and taken into consideration that they would be going against guys) Everyone knows damn right thats true, but noOOo, the girls in the conversaion got so mad at me.</p>
<p>i'm a girl and agree with the presented ideas applying on a general basis to society. damn it appears that we must be equal to men physically, etc, etc, etc. why not just grow a ***** and be a man then?</p>
<p>specialization is one of the best concepts both in economics and other aspects of life and we shouldn't look as being different then men as a bad thing or try to equalize ourselves by saying we can do everything they do. sometimes if women specialize in certain aspects and men in others and we then bring those aspects together you have a much more happy, productive team.</p>
<p>You can't argue with the fact that women should be paid the same as men. There's no way around it. Especially considering that most women today choose not to marry (and for good reason). It is only appropriate that they would be paid the same (if not more, considering they are the ones usually stuck with kids somehow).</p>
<p>So women should be paid more in jobs because they have the ability to have kids? And yet somehow, they need to take time off work because of pregnancy.......I'm all for equal opportunity but the logic doesn't flow there. There's no profit in paying an employee more if the employee has to take a break from work.</p>
<p>Btw, salaries should not be determined by gender. Salaries should be determined by productivity.</p>
<p>Yeah, exactly, I was just giving the extremist view using the same rationale for why women are paid less (based on possible reproduction that will most likely not occur). But I agree. Gender should not have anything to do with it. It's who is best for the job and productivity once hired.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Generally speaking a court will assign the child to the mother, then make the father pay child support.</p></li>
<li><p>There are simply some things men are better than women at and vice versa. If a firefighter has to be able to lift 300 lbs and they lower the standard to 250 for women because htey are built differently then I might just be *ed when it comes to fire if I was fat. Some things are meant to be different ways.</p></li>
<li><p>What are you talking about most women choose not to marry? Maybe you meant marry young, but most women still do marry. And women are hardly "stuck" with the child. In most cases:</p></li>
<li><p>The woman gets custody over the father.</p></li>
<li><p>She could have an abortion if she doesn't want the child.</p></li>
<li><p>She controls what goes in and out of her and she has the power to take morning after pills, along with condom usage and *.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Honestly, a woman getting pregnant is not such a surprise thing anymore in our society, with all the precautions we have its harder to have kids then to not have them.</p>
<p>Ever thought about the draft? Selective Service wants men to register but not women. If people are speaking about equality, how about making women sign up as well?
But, what can we do? Nothing. Just let it be.</p>
<p>The truth about the wage gap is closer to the fact that more men work longer and harder than women. Sometimes you don't have to look past the front door to get the answer.</p>
<p>hmmm let me think about that...no, I think it has a lot to do with the possibility/fear of maternity leave. And no, I think marriage is truly becoming a less popular option for all--I surely don't see its appeal. Also, it is an archaic institution that should not hold legal entity if we want true separation of church and state.</p>
<p>I heard about that firefighter thing...its absolutely retarded. Women are physically smaller, its that simple...why can't the activist groups get over that?</p>
<p>Re: the draft -- Back in the late 1970s and 1980s, feminist groups argued that everyone (women and men) should be subject to the draft. Conservatives were opposed. Therefore, it is simply historically inaccurate to claim that people most interested in pursuing gender equality think that women shouldn't be subject to the draft.</p>
<p>By the way, "It's like, women are always offended by something or another. If it's not something that reinforces an accepted traditional gender role (i.e. man should pay), they are "offended". If it's not something that reinforces modern feminist thought (i.e. women should make the same amount of money as men), they get offended." is awfully vague and overly inclusive. All "women" are not "always offended" by the same things, are they?</p>
<p>First of all, there IS a LEGITIMATE fear and possibility of maternity leave. It IS reality. If you choose not to marry or have sex, that's fine, but the reality is that the human race would end if half the population (i.e., women) all decided they weren't going to have children. While could be a possibility if we have free will (albeit, a remote one), if we are evolved as many here would claim, we <em>have</em> to be deterministic (meaning we lack freewill). If we are deterministic than we are hardwired as a race to do whatever is necessary to produce another generation, and, therefore, there will never come a time when maternity leave is not a significant problem for employers -- it is a hardwired, genetically coded reality.</p>
<p>secondly, if reproduction is a necessity, then what makes marriage a less appealing option?
according to this</a> article single mothers are more likely to be domestically abused than are married ones</p>
<p>The Census Bureau published the following:
Premarital childbearing among women is on the rise not only among teenage women but also among older women. There is evidence that many young unmarried mothers and couples who marry as a result of premaritally conceived child experience considerable economic disadvantages. Meanwhile, the social stigma associated with being unmarried and having a baby has undergone changing levels of acceptance by members at various levels of society such as families, schools and organizations. Prenatal and postnatal classes offered to teenage women in schools, and the availability of federal welfare programs such as "Women, Infants and Children" which benefit many unwed mothers are a few examples which demonstrate society's concerns over out-of-wedlock childbearing and its effort to look at the issue from more than the viewpoint of a social stigma.
(from Trends in Marital Status 1930-1994 -- <a href="http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0020/twps0020.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0020/twps0020.html</a>)</p>
<p>
[quote]
By the way, "It's like, women are always offended by something or another. If it's not something that reinforces an accepted traditional gender role (i.e. man should pay), they are "offended". If it's not something that reinforces modern feminist thought (i.e. women should make the same amount of money as men), they get offended." is awfully vague and overly inclusive. All "women" are not "always offended" by the same things, are they?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, of course not. But the simple fact that it seems like when something that offends women's groups and feminists has to get discussed; we as a society take time out to make sure our young girls aren't in peril, or our adult women, we have to take time out and address it. </p>
<p>Just like the other morning I saw on the Today show about how a recent study showed how young girls struggle with being perfect. Oh please!</p>
<p>There are lots of issues involving lots of groups that get discussed all the time. I think (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you're saying that women's concerns are talked about too much. If so, I guess I'd have to ask, compared to what?</p>
<p>If you are to ESTABLISH, i.e., prove, that women's issues get discussed disproportionately, then you need to do more than just assert it. First, of all, what would it mean for issues affecting women and girls to be discussed too much? Since women are 50% of the population, you might expect that discussions of issues that predominately affect women to make up 50% of discussions of issues that involve mostly women or men. You'd also have to actually figure out what % of gender-based issues are about women vs. men.</p>
<p>Second, if you were to argue that issues should be discussed proportional to gender composition of the population, you would have to answer the objection to this -- that women might have less power and more problems and thus their concerns actually warrant more discussion. </p>
<p>Third, you should clarify what you mean by "we as a society" "take out time to address" some issues. Evidently some of this discussion takes place on the Today show, a tv show with a very high female viewership, thus a locale where the viewers might be very interested in the topic of women and girls. Also, I wouldn't consider day time tv to be that great an indicator of societal interest. Instead, if there was a high degree of discussion of women's issues on shows that lots of women watch, this would be a simple media market effect.</p>
<p>"...that women might have less power and more problems and thus their concerns actually warrant more discussion."</p>
<p>Exactly...you would gripe too, Jason, if you were going to grow up working twice as hard as the lowlife boys in your class but most likely making less money. Women do not have as much moneymaking power in today's society and that is a problem that needs to be addressed.It's not just being politically correct. It's a real issue that there is an income disparity.</p>
<p>This can relate to the racism issue in which African-Americans are offended by calling them the N word. Same thing--except some chauvi-nazis consider it okay to be sexist, just like some racists consider racist comments cool.</p>