Zoofeminism, a femthread

[egoldstein]

1. It's not debatable. If women work less hours then it's obvious that they will earn less. It's not like women will earn less simply because they're women. It's more complicated.

Global Gender Gap Report 2021

Another generation of women will have to wait for gender parity, according to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 2021. As the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic continues to be felt, closing the global gender gap has increased by a generation from 99.5 years to 135.6 years.

www.weforum.org

It's a well known, world-wide issue.

3. What do you mean by that? From what I know some issues (like breast cancer) have better finding compared with, let's say, testicles cancer. The same goes with awareness campaigns.

According to the annual report in the American Cancer Society journal, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, the number of deaths for testicular cancer will be about 470. The number of deaths from breast cancer for women ... 43,170; that's quite a disparity.

 

[Caniform]

Equal pay in the same Job is debateable.

Women tend to have lower incomes in many Western countries. But why is that? There is no law that says that men should earn more. There are no collective agreements between unions and employers' associations that say that women should earn less. At least such agreements don't exist in my country to my knowledge.

The only way I can explain a different payment of men and women with the same qualifications and the same experience and the same success in the same job is that women tend to accept lower wages than men in secret negotiations. But if that is the case, then it's not a discrimination issue.

If it bothers you, even though it is not discrimination, you could think about how to change the situation. One way would be to force all wages to be made public. Maybe the average woman would be less shy to demand more then, if she sees what her co-workers get. It would be interesting how the income statistics would develop then. Forcing employers and employees to make their wages public may not be compatible with people's ideas of freedom and of privacy in many countries though.

Control over their own bodies

Not sure what you mean, but in case you refer to abortion like @Kombajnista guessed:

The abortion question is definitely a real issue where women can get into a serious conflict. It is, however, not a male vs. female conflict. The central conflict is between mother and kid, her bodily autonomy versus the life of the unborn child. That conflict is well captured in how the different sides in the debate label themselves: pro-choice and pro-life. If men could get pregnant, they would have the same conflict – their bodily autonomy vs. that of the child. It's not like women would be restricted in when they can abort, but men aren't. Men simply don't get pregnant. The fact that men can't get pregnant is nobody's fault and can't be changed by lawmakers or activists. Therefore using the abortion issue as an example for unequal rights between men and women would be wrong and ignore what critics of abortions are actually concerned about: the life of the unborn child.

Medical and drug research is still dominated by what works for men

This is also a real and important issue. But why is drug research dominated by what works for men?

My guess: men tend to be less risk-averse and hence quicker to volunteer for drug tests. So more drugs are tested on men. You can't blame men for volunteering as guinea pigs, can you? Secondly, men don't get pregnant, but women do. Again, this is nobody's fault. But a pregnancy would increase the risks involved in drug tests significantly. Remember what Contergan/Thalomid/Thalidomide did to unborn children, crippling them for life. Avoidance of that risk would explain a preference of pharmaceutic companies to use male test subjects first. I don't know if that is the case, but it's a common sense explanation.

Surely more research should be done about sex-specific drug effects. But it's neither an example for women having less rights than men nor is this necessarily a result of discrimination against women.

Clothing, especially work wardrobes, is more expensive to clean, Item for item.

Do you mean a woman has to pay more to get her trousers cleaned than a man has to pay for the same service? I've never heard of that, but that would be bad indeed.

 

[Kombajnista]

It's a well known, world-wide issue.

I don't know about other countries but in Poland it's illegal to pay someone less because of sex (and not only that). So if someone think that it's the case - go to court, you'll win easily. So called 'wage gap' was debunked many times. So yeah, this is mostly crap, talking about indicators like 'Legislators, senior officials and managers, %' and 'Professional and technical workers, %'. Generally speaking, men work more and in more profitable industries, also on CEO positions. They are better at those things. Blame mother nature for that.
You think that someone will pay a woman less because he doesn't like women?

According to the annual report in the American Cancer Society journal, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, the number of deaths for testicular cancer will be about 470. The number of deaths from breast cancer for women ... 43,170; that's quite a disparity.

What about funding? I can say (and prove it with data) that men will commit suicide more often, the same goes with accidents at work.

 

[saddlebum66]

1. It's not debatable. If women work less hours then it's obvious that they will earn less. It's not like women will earn less simply because they're women. It's more complicated.
2. You mean abortion? They have that right in many Western countries.
3. What do you mean by that? From what I know some issues (like breast cancer) have better finding compared with, let's say, testicles cancer. The same goes with awareness campaigns.
4. Don't know a lot about clothing so can't say anything on that.

What happens in Poland apparently stays in Poland...I was not talking about fewer HOURS, bub....I mean less money for the SAME WORK, FOR THE SAME HOURS PUT IN. Starting at less money ending at less money.

Yes I meant abortion. Restrictions now and in the future. Women's rights to their own bodies are being eroded.

I mean exactly what I said. Women's Medicine lags far behind men's. Men fo the research, fund the studies. PROPOSE the Studies, which is even more important. Heart, endocrine, digestive, nervous, reproductive and all the various bodily systems lag. Up until very recently, many women in the US died of heart attacks not even diagnosed, because the symptoms were "quieter" than men's. Cardiac issues in men are more pronounced. Testicular issues, prostate issues, penile issues are all fairly well-researched...Similar issues for women are often treated as" Hysteria " , even today, and the attitude toward those is "take this and call me if it doesnt improve". Veterinarians know more about Bitches and Mares than medical Doctors know about human females.

To go with the other things you dont know about? Im talking generally of the West, but Ex Warsaw pact Nations are different. Most of those have a history of NO RIGHTS for anyone while under the control of the USSR.

Its very noticeable that its the males here pooh-poohing the statements. Its not happening to THEM so it must not be happening, Right...?

You don't need to own a Pussy Hat to see it...

 

[egoldstein]

I don't know about other countries but in Poland....

If you want to talk about only how things are in Poland, say so. You've been speaking quite broadly and what you've been saying is demonstrably untrue for the vast majority of women. Here's a link talking about it in Poland...from the Polish government. https://www.gov.pl/web/family/gender-pay-gap-in-poland

So called 'wage gap' was debunked many times. So yeah, this is mostly crap, talking about indicators like 'Legislators, senior officials and managers, %' and 'Professional and technical workers, %'.

And yet it's a well documented and quantifiable thing. I've provided you a few links already. You can ignore reality if you wish, but facts don't cease to exist because you ignore them.

Generally speaking, men work more and in more profitable industries, also on CEO positions. They are better at those things. Blame mother nature for that.

I'd like to see your data for that.

You think that someone will pay a woman less because he doesn't like women?

It's a fact that in many places women are paid less than men, even in places where that's techicanlly illegal.

What about funding? I can say (and prove it with data) that men will commit suicide more often, the same goes with accidents at work.

Hooray? I have no idea what your point is with this, assuming you have one.

 

[saddlebum66]

I'd like to see your data for that.

You cant....its a Seeeeeecret....like Injun Joe being ticklish.
Seriously....I thought Neanderthalers left the Building 100K years ago...Mother Nature? Oh brother!

 

[Kombajnista]

If you want to talk about only how things are in Poland, say so. You've been speaking quite broadly and what you've been saying is demonstrably untrue for the vast majority of women. Here's a link talking about it in Poland...from the Polish government. https://www.gov.pl/web/family/gender-pay-gap-in-poland

Well I don't know a lot about other countries and their laws but I presumed that people from Western Europe are more 'woke' (because they often are) so they're trying to fix this 'issue' more seriously i.e. legislation in those countries is even more restrictive. My bad. I only heard that the US is lacking behind in holidays and other benefits but it's bad for everyone, not just women.

And yet it's a well documented and quantifiable thing. I've provided you a few links already. You can ignore reality if you wish, but facts don't cease to exist because you ignore them.

Ignore what exactly? That people will earn a different amount of money based of their skills, experience and life choices?
Why, in your opinion, we have those differences? Do you think it's because of patriarchy, sexism or something like that?

I'd like to see your data for that.

I thought that I don't have to show data for something obvious but ok. How many women do you see on that list:

The World’s Most Influential CEOs And Business Executives Of 2024 - CEOWORLD magazine

Who do you think is the best CEO in the world? Is it Volkswagen’s Dr. Oliver Blume, Darren W. Woods of Exxon Mobil, Apple’s Tim Cook, or Jane Fraser of Citigroup? Whether famous or not, these CEOs are highly successful, talented, and influential. For long-term investors, it’s worth keeping an...

ceoworld.biz

It's a fact that in many places women are paid less than men, even in places where that's techicanlly illegal.

So, I don't know, go to court and win?

Hooray? I have no idea what your point is with this, assuming you have one.

Well I talked about funding and you wrote about deaths so...
But let us talk about both - deaths and funding:

Current Grants by Cancer Type

Find research and health professional training grants by cancer type on American Cancer Society’s (ACS) website.

www.cancer.org

As you can see - 78 mil for breast cancer and 21 mil for prostate. You'll have 264,000 cases of breast cancer and 42,000 deaths in the US (as shown here https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/basic_info/index.htm). You'll have 288,300 cases of prostate cancer and 34,700 deaths in the US (as shown here https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/prostate-cancer/statistics). But funding for breast cancer is almost 4 times bigger.

 

[SimSexrets]

How is this not a DF thread yet?

 

[FloofyNewfie]

How is this not a DF thread yet?

So far it's been... mostly... acceptable debating behavior in this thread. And I'm all for a good clean debate about a subject that for some people can be a bit on the touchier side. But if this thread goes off the rails I'll either have to clean it or lock it, as there's already a handful of feminism related thread in that section.

 

[saddlebum66]

Well I don't know a lot about other countries and their laws but I presumed that people from Western Europe are more 'woke' (because they often are) so they're trying to fix this 'issue' more seriously i.e. legislation in those countries is even more restrictive. My bad. I only heard that the US is lacking behind in holidays and other benefits but it's bad for everyone, not just women.


Ignore what exactly? That people will earn a different amount of money based of their skills, experience and life choices?
Why, in your opinion, we have those differences? Do you think it's because of patriarchy, sexism or something like that?


I thought that I don't have to show data for something obvious but ok. How many women do you see on that list:

The World’s Most Influential CEOs And Business Executives Of 2024 - CEOWORLD magazine

Who do you think is the best CEO in the world? Is it Volkswagen’s Dr. Oliver Blume, Darren W. Woods of Exxon Mobil, Apple’s Tim Cook, or Jane Fraser of Citigroup? Whether famous or not, these CEOs are highly successful, talented, and influential. For long-term investors, it’s worth keeping an...

ceoworld.biz

So, I don't know, go to court and win?


Well I talked about funding and you wrote about deaths so...
But let us talk about both - deaths and funding:

Current Grants by Cancer Type

Find research and health professional training grants by cancer type on American Cancer Society’s (ACS) website.

www.cancer.org

As you can see - 78 mil for breast cancer and 21 mil for prostate. You'll have 264,000 cases of breast cancer and 42,000 deaths in the US (as shown here https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/basic_info/index.htm). You'll have 288,300 cases of prostate cancer and 34,700 deaths in the US (as shown here https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/prostate-cancer/statistics). But funding for breast cancer is almost 4 times bigger.

You're still looking at small money, AND a realization that the chickens come home to roost. OVER HOW LONG is that money supposed to fund research? Over how many decades of short or no funding is that supposed to be making up for? And anytime you put CEOs like Buffett on your mother nature list, youd best look around for female contemporaries in the same positions for similar periods....its a desert. The "Glass Ceiling" is twenty floors lower. That kind of dubious and specious argument is the same crap that's been pumping along since Neanderthal WOMAN raised babies, cooked dinner, and swept the dust off the dirt floor. It may have worked, but it was never the only solution....unless youre male....in which case its quite satisfactory.

You havent presented Data....youre presenting results of bias. Youre still stuck in the idea of women as "goofing off" or only in the executive employments because they're cute, or because it shuts them up.
Some folks are probably better off not knowing, I suppose...The net allows some surprising areas of ignorance to flourish.