Feminists going full retard.

[bogan]

Then where is this Majority?

Because the Majority in Academia are batshit crazy, the Majority at protests are batshit crazy, the majority on Feminist websites such as Jezebel and Everydayfeminism are batshit crazy - so I have to ask where are they?

It sounds like you're trying to say that they aren't Scotsmen, even though they come from Scotland....



It's equality of Opportunity - to have the same allowance for Paternity leave.



Full time work for Men per working day: 8.9 hours
Full time work for Women per working day: 8.2 hours (so nearly an hour difference per day)

Source



Different Source

Average full time hours for men - between 39.1-39.4 (take a note of the difference
Average full time hours for Women - between 33.9-34.5 (much larger spread)

Different again source

What more do you need?



In the absence of an opposing study, it indicates that there is good evidence to there being a hiring Bias.



WAS.

What you have described is known as 2nd wave Feminism, 3rd wave Feminism (which is the current wave, and the one I have serious issues with) has as a central tenant of Patriarchy Theory (which is a Conspiracy theory), The Wage Gap (also a conspiracy theory) and Rape Culture (see previous)

Content with the gender equality in NZ. Your extremists are still the more active part since they still have work to do, the for-equality feminists get righteously pissed off at antiquated bullshit that occasionally comes forth as per the channcellors remarks, then have nothing more to do, so you don't hear from them.

No, I'm saying that not all Irish are IRA terrorists, even though they come from Ireland.

One partner has the right to maternity leave, this defaults to the one which has been through the physical ordeal of childbirth, and is physically required for natural breastfeeding. If the couple decides both partners need leave, then they should take responsibility and ensure financial sufficiency for the duration of that leave.

What I asked for, a comparison in the same field of work.

It suggests a hiring bias for "tenure-track assistant professorships", you could stretch it to suggesting wider studies are required; but it in no way suggests a 2:1 hiring bias is present for STEM based careers.

IS, redefining feminism to focus on the extremists (which we agree are wrong) is pretty much the definition of a straw-man argument. If you want to qualify your disagreement with feminsim as that of 3-rdwave feminism, or feminist extremists, then by all means go ahead; but as far as I can tell, you're the only one bringing them into the discussion.

[yokel]

The irony with you making that comment and then posting that article is that both the scientists quoted in that item were female (Dr Ngaire Hobden & Dr Megan Lourie) while the male in the item was someone who was unwilling to apply for a middle management position (another area with a staff shortfall).

It's not irony you stupid woman, it's narrative journalism.
They choose to talk to women scientists.
And the irony in this article is that is a male that's seen as being part of the shortage issue, when the reality is it's females with their chick logic.

Women are intellectually inferior to men.

[WristTwister]

It's not irony you stupid woman, it's narrative journalism.
They choose to talk to women scientists.

Women are intellectually inferior to men.

It was ironic that you chose to share that item, considering they choose to talk to women scientists.

[mashman]

Men are different to women... quick, pay them differently. Humans aren't different, pay them the same

[yokel]

Men are different to women... quick, pay them differently. Humans aren't different, pay them the same

You get paid what you're worth or people are willing to pay.
It's the difference between a 2 dollar and high class hooker.

Feminism is a communist ideology, it's why it's fucking retarded.

[husaberg]

Seen as the female brain sucks at maths and science, as emotion kills logic.

.

Thats especially ironic, given your long standing, well documented, profound inability, to be able to apply logic and indeed understand, basic math and science.

[yokel]

Thats especially ironic given your long standing well documented inability to be able to apply logic and understand basic math and science.

You're brainwashed beta male.
It's why you call certain things "conspiracy theory" and what not.
My maths is correct numb nuts

[Akzle]

You're brainwashed beta male.
It's why you call certain things "conspiracy theory" and what not.
My maths is correct numb nuts

now i think you've gone off the deep end there bud...

i don't know how applicable 'beta' is to that cunt.
...nor 'male'.

...and if you were looking for a brain to wash you'd be shit out of luck... the prick's dumber than two short hammers.

[bogan]

Please keep it civil and stay on the discussion topic.

[TheDemonLord]

Content with the gender equality in NZ.

So why are they still Feminists? Why are they still fighting for Equality - when they have won?

To use an Analogy, it would be like the USAF deciding to carpet bomb Munich after the German surrender. Does that not tell you that perhaps they aren't content with the state of Equality? And this malcontent is why they are still Feminists and it's why it's not a strawman to lump them in with other Malcontent (and batshit crazy) Feminists?

The second issue you have to account for, is that presumably All Feminists are guided by Feminist theory and Feminist discussion - which takes place in Feminist Academia.

Case in point - Duke University (widely regarded as a hotbed of Feminist/SJW thought and discussion) has produced this gem of a paper:

Black Anality

There's a TL;DR video on it (where I lazily sourced it from) that goes through the article in full Link to the video - if you are interested

Thus the Logic follows that if Feminist Academia is producing radical or extreme view points, these eventually trickle down into mainstream Feminist view points. All you need to do is look at what happened between the 2nd and 3rd waves.

Your extremists are still the more active part since they still have work to do, the for-equality feminists get righteously pissed off at antiquated bullshit that occasionally comes forth as per the channcellors remarks, then have nothing more to do, so you don't hear from them.

That would be fine, if we didn't hear more from them - but we do. Constantly. To the point where the Head of state of one of the most powerful nations on earth repeats their message, despite his own government going 'yeah that isn't actually true')

No, I'm saying that not all Irish are IRA terrorists, even though they come from Ireland.

And I'm saying that they won, Ireland is now a sovreign nation, Northern Ireland is no longer a thing, and the IRA are still blowing up Buses in Manchester.

One partner has the right to maternity leave, this defaults to the one which has been through the physical ordeal of childbirth, and is physically required for natural breastfeeding. If the couple decides both partners need leave, then they should take responsibility and ensure financial sufficiency for the duration of that leave.

The problem with this argument is by that logic, Maternity leave should be a couple of weeks only - at which point you can take it out of your Holiday allowance and there is no need for Maternity leave.

Now, that would be a fair and equitable solution - as per my remarks to Katman, I think there is societal good that comes from Parental leave, problem is in NZ, Fathers are treated as inferior to the Mother by the state/government/legal system etc.

What I asked for, a comparison in the same field of work.

I don't have that Data - but the Data I do have shows a massive imbalance, I can also give you anecdotal evidence that every job I've worked - if anyone was on part time or flexitime hours, they would be Female.

I would concede an extrapolation of your point that if you compare a Male ER DR and a Female ER DR, they probably work the same silly hours - however if you do that, you must concede the counter point that in that case a statistically relevant number of Women are opting out of these positions as they don't want to have that type of Work/life balance.

Problem then becomes when you look at the earnings disparity and try to claim that it is due to Sexism, when in fact it is down to personal choice.

It suggests a hiring bias for "tenure-track assistant professorships", you could stretch it to suggesting wider studies are required; but it in no way suggests a 2:1 hiring bias is present for STEM based careers.

And why is then this Hiring Bias for Professorships? Could it be because if someone looks at a room and sees a bunch of Old White Men - they scream Racism and Sexism at the top of their lungs with no regard for examining if each individual was in fact the best candidate for the job?

Real world example - in my current company, all the Systems Administrators team are Male (which matches up with the Masculine predilection for things) - yet our HR director in a speech to the company said straight out that the next SA they want to hire will be a Female. With no reference to their skillset - that was the most important factor as dictated by HR.

Does this not suggest that the tenants of 'Affirmative Sexism' are completely at odds with the concept of Meritocracy? And when you have companies such as Google committing to have a more 'Diverse work force' - the only way this can be achieved is by discriminatory hiring practice....

Which is the very thing that they are complaining about!!!!

IS, redefining feminism to focus on the extremists (which we agree are wrong) is pretty much the definition of a straw-man argument. If you want to qualify your disagreement with feminsim as that of 3-rdwave feminism, or feminist extremists, then by all means go ahead; but as far as I can tell, you're the only one bringing them into the discussion.

Nope. Was.

Back in the 80's Feminist Academia needed new Dragons to slay in order to justify both it's existence and the power that they had acquired.

Cue the Theory of Intersectionality - which was swallowed hook, line, sinker, rod, Angler, Boat, Port and country. This theory (which btw was never subject to any real world expriment, was just asserted and then pyramid cited ad nauseum) has formed the basis for ALL feminist academia, public discourse etc. of the last 30 years.

The funny thing is that there are several 2nd Wave Feminists still active - such as Christina Hoff Summers - who has been excommunicated for daring to say that Maybe the Modern version of Feminism is a little bit nuts.

Then there people such as Germaine Greer - one of the most influential Feminists of the 2nd wave, she's been a persona non grata for daring to say that Trans-women, by virtue of not having an XX chromosome, a Uterus, breasts etc. aren't real women.

The principle of Feminism - that of Equality for all - is good, noble and laudible. However this does little to describe the actions of the group. Just like Communism (which btw - a large percentage of Feminist Academics identify as Marxist - yah know - that Ideology that has been responsible for the MOST amount of Genocide in the 20th century - you may want to think on that) - the idea says nothing of the actions of the group.

I would suggest checking out the works of Jordan Peterson

I'll leave this here, in particular - I want you to contrast what someone (who is an Academic Gender studies professor) says about Biological Sex. If this does not show how far up their own assholes the Academic Feminists have gone, then I guess nothing will. You are welcome to your opinion (as always), just as I am welcome to disagree.

[husaberg]

Seen as the female brain sucks at maths and science, as emotion kills logic.

.

Thats especially ironic given your long standing well documented inability to be able to apply logic and understand basic math and science.

My maths is correct numb nuts

Your maths, your science and your logic are many many things, Correct is not one of them.
So using your own YOKEL logic stated above, does that make you less of a man.

[bogan]

So why are they still Feminists? Why are they still fighting for Equality - when they have won?

To use an Analogy, it would be like the USAF deciding to carpet bomb Munich after the German surrender. Does that not tell you that perhaps they aren't content with the state of Equality? And this malcontent is why they are still Feminists and it's why it's not a strawman to lump them in with other Malcontent (and batshit crazy) Feminists?

The second issue you have to account for, is that presumably All Feminists are guided by Feminist theory and Feminist discussion - which takes place in Feminist Academia.

Case in point - Duke University (widely regarded as a hotbed of Feminist/SJW thought and discussion) has produced this gem of a paper:

Black Anality

There's a TL;DR video on it (where I lazily sourced it from) that goes through the article in full Link to the video - if you are interested

Thus the Logic follows that if Feminist Academia is producing radical or extreme view points, these eventually trickle down into mainstream Feminist view points. All you need to do is look at what happened between the 2nd and 3rd waves.



That would be fine, if we didn't hear more from them - but we do. Constantly. To the point where the Head of state of one of the most powerful nations on earth repeats their message, despite his own government going 'yeah that isn't actually true')



And I'm saying that they won, Ireland is now a sovreign nation, Northern Ireland is no longer a thing, and the IRA are still blowing up Buses in Manchester.



The problem with this argument is by that logic, Maternity leave should be a couple of weeks only - at which point you can take it out of your Holiday allowance and there is no need for Maternity leave.

Now, that would be a fair and equitable solution - as per my remarks to Katman, I think there is societal good that comes from Parental leave, problem is in NZ, Fathers are treated as inferior to the Mother by the state/government/legal system etc.



I don't have that Data - but the Data I do have shows a massive imbalance, I can also give you anecdotal evidence that every job I've worked - if anyone was on part time or flexitime hours, they would be Female.

I would concede an extrapolation of your point that if you compare a Male ER DR and a Female ER DR, they probably work the same silly hours - however if you do that, you must concede the counter point that in that case a statistically relevant number of Women are opting out of these positions as they don't want to have that type of Work/life balance.

Problem then becomes when you look at the earnings disparity and try to claim that it is due to Sexism, when in fact it is down to personal choice.



And why is then this Hiring Bias for Professorships? Could it be because if someone looks at a room and sees a bunch of Old White Men - they scream Racism and Sexism at the top of their lungs with no regard for examining if each individual was in fact the best candidate for the job?

Real world example - in my current company, all the Systems Administrators team are Male (which matches up with the Masculine predilection for things) - yet our HR director in a speech to the company said straight out that the next SA they want to hire will be a Female. With no reference to their skillset - that was the most important factor as dictated by HR.

Does this not suggest that the tenants of 'Affirmative Sexism' are completely at odds with the concept of Meritocracy? And when you have companies such as Google committing to have a more 'Diverse work force' - the only way this can be achieved is by discriminatory hiring practice....

Which is the very thing that they are complaining about!!!!



Nope. Was.

Back in the 80's Feminist Academia needed new Dragons to slay in order to justify both it's existence and the power that they had acquired.

Cue the Theory of Intersectionality - which was swallowed hook, line, sinker, rod, Angler, Boat, Port and country. This theory (which btw was never subject to any real world expriment, was just asserted and then pyramid cited ad nauseum) has formed the basis for ALL feminist academia, public discourse etc. of the last 30 years.

The funny thing is that there are several 2nd Wave Feminists still active - such as Christina Hoff Summers - who has been excommunicated for daring to say that Maybe the Modern version of Feminism is a little bit nuts.

Then there people such as Germaine Greer - one of the most influential Feminists of the 2nd wave, she's been a persona non grata for daring to say that Trans-women, by virtue of not having an XX chromosome, a Uterus, breasts etc. aren't real women.

The principle of Feminism - that of Equality for all - is good, noble and laudible. However this does little to describe the actions of the group. Just like Communism (which btw - a large percentage of Feminist Academics identify as Marxist - yah know - that Ideology that has been responsible for the MOST amount of Genocide in the 20th century - you may want to think on that) - the idea says nothing of the actions of the group.

I would suggest checking out the works of Jordan Peterson

I'll leave this here, in particular - I want you to contrast what someone (who is an Academic Gender studies professor) says about Biological Sex. If this does not show how far up their own assholes the Academic Feminists have gone, then I guess nothing will. You are welcome to your opinion (as always), just as I am welcome to disagree.

Not at all, the correct application of that analogy would be for the USAF to continue to exist after the german surrender, which it did. Just like feminists now are still feminists, in order to maintain the equality they have gained.

Incorrect, there is no feminism high council or centralised power structure based in academia. They're for equality, it is a simple concept.

Which is why your problem is with feminist extremists, 3rd wavers, or whatever other label for their sub-group of feminism you use.

Nah that doesn't stick, cos even were Ireland a sovereign nation, not all of them would be IRA.

Then maybe a couple of weeks maternity leave is all it should be then. I still do not think it greatly inequitable at the longer duration since maternity leave can be transferred to the father though.

Then get some better numbers, and throw away all your anecdotal flex-time stuff because that is irrelevant to the point, women have the right to chose what job they work. If their choices (or hiring) are somehow biased towards lower hour careers or jobs, you've no basis to say they don't work as hard; just as you rightly point out they've no basis to say they do not get paid as much. Compare apples with apples, data from the same field of work is required. Hiring data from actual hires is required. Chances are it was sexism that got the old male professors there, some of them were probably alive when women got the vote ; it's not an excuse, but it does point to a situation in which the specific hiring practices of that field and position (why I suggest the data is not extensible to other fields) have swung the other way in sexism.

Not sure if you've ever personally hired anyone, but it isn't all about best performance on paper; personality and how well the candidate gets on with the interviewer/s also plays a large part in the final choice. Guys often have more in common (why friend groups are still fairly gender biased). At some point you've got to be analytical and say, are we not employing women because there are no suitable applicants, or are they not making the final cut because of personal bias. If HR looks through and sees the last 10 hires had plenty of female applicants who were just as good on paper, yet there were ten male hires, it pretty much justifies an affirmative sexism hiring directive to counter the existing sexist hiring practices. Not saying that's what is happening, some HR people do get carried away with affirmative sexism, just saying that it could actually be justified.

The principle of Feminism - that of Equality for all - is good, noble and laudible.

Which is why an anti-feminist stance is like pushing shit uphill with a rake, do yourself a favor and become anti-3rdwave-feminist, or anti-feminist-extremist instead.

[yokel]

So why are they still Feminists? Why are they still fighting for Equality - when they have won?

To use an Analogy, it would be like the USAF deciding to carpet bomb Munich after the German surrender. Does that not tell you that perhaps they aren't content with the state of Equality? And this malcontent is why they are still Feminists and it's why it's not a strawman to lump them in with other Malcontent (and batshit crazy) Feminists?

The second issue you have to account for, is that presumably All Feminists are guided by Feminist theory and Feminist discussion - which takes place in Feminist Academia.

Case in point - Duke University (widely regarded as a hotbed of Feminist/SJW thought and discussion) has produced this gem of a paper:

Black Anality

There's a TL;DR video on it (where I lazily sourced it from) that goes through the article in full Link to the video - if you are interested

Thus the Logic follows that if Feminist Academia is producing radical or extreme view points, these eventually trickle down into mainstream Feminist view points. All you need to do is look at what happened between the 2nd and 3rd waves.



That would be fine, if we didn't hear more from them - but we do. Constantly. To the point where the Head of state of one of the most powerful nations on earth repeats their message, despite his own government going 'yeah that isn't actually true')



And I'm saying that they won, Ireland is now a sovreign nation, Northern Ireland is no longer a thing, and the IRA are still blowing up Buses in Manchester.



The problem with this argument is by that logic, Maternity leave should be a couple of weeks only - at which point you can take it out of your Holiday allowance and there is no need for Maternity leave.

Now, that would be a fair and equitable solution - as per my remarks to Katman, I think there is societal good that comes from Parental leave, problem is in NZ, Fathers are treated as inferior to the Mother by the state/government/legal system etc.



I don't have that Data - but the Data I do have shows a massive imbalance, I can also give you anecdotal evidence that every job I've worked - if anyone was on part time or flexitime hours, they would be Female.

I would concede an extrapolation of your point that if you compare a Male ER DR and a Female ER DR, they probably work the same silly hours - however if you do that, you must concede the counter point that in that case a statistically relevant number of Women are opting out of these positions as they don't want to have that type of Work/life balance.

Problem then becomes when you look at the earnings disparity and try to claim that it is due to Sexism, when in fact it is down to personal choice.



And why is then this Hiring Bias for Professorships? Could it be because if someone looks at a room and sees a bunch of Old White Men - they scream Racism and Sexism at the top of their lungs with no regard for examining if each individual was in fact the best candidate for the job?

Real world example - in my current company, all the Systems Administrators team are Male (which matches up with the Masculine predilection for things) - yet our HR director in a speech to the company said straight out that the next SA they want to hire will be a Female. With no reference to their skillset - that was the most important factor as dictated by HR.

Does this not suggest that the tenants of 'Affirmative Sexism' are completely at odds with the concept of Meritocracy? And when you have companies such as Google committing to have a more 'Diverse work force' - the only way this can be achieved is by discriminatory hiring practice....

Which is the very thing that they are complaining about!!!!



Nope. Was.

Back in the 80's Feminist Academia needed new Dragons to slay in order to justify both it's existence and the power that they had acquired.

Cue the Theory of Intersectionality - which was swallowed hook, line, sinker, rod, Angler, Boat, Port and country. This theory (which btw was never subject to any real world expriment, was just asserted and then pyramid cited ad nauseum) has formed the basis for ALL feminist academia, public discourse etc. of the last 30 years.

The funny thing is that there are several 2nd Wave Feminists still active - such as Christina Hoff Summers - who has been excommunicated for daring to say that Maybe the Modern version of Feminism is a little bit nuts.

Then there people such as Germaine Greer - one of the most influential Feminists of the 2nd wave, she's been a persona non grata for daring to say that Trans-women, by virtue of not having an XX chromosome, a Uterus, breasts etc. aren't real women.

The principle of Feminism - that of Equality for all - is good, noble and laudible. However this does little to describe the actions of the group. Just like Communism (which btw - a large percentage of Feminist Academics identify as Marxist - yah know - that Ideology that has been responsible for the MOST amount of Genocide in the 20th century - you may want to think on that) - the idea says nothing of the actions of the group.

I would suggest checking out the works of Jordan Peterson

I'll leave this here, in particular - I want you to contrast what someone (who is an Academic Gender studies professor) says about Biological Sex. If this does not show how far up their own assholes the Academic Feminists have gone, then I guess nothing will. You are welcome to your opinion (as always), just as I am welcome to disagree.

Rights - responsibility = privilege.

Women want the same rights as men but not the responsibilities that go with them.

Because....... Well they're women.

The fempocalypse, coming to a western civilization near you.

[Crasherfromwayback]

It's the difference between a 2 dollar and high class hooker.

.

How much did you pay for your hooker import?

[pritch]

Please keep it civil and stay on the discussion topic.

I did note that after OAB's little tune up people were using the word "egg" rather than more abusive alternatives.

Some years ago I read the biography of the former Police Inspector who used to run that Auckland crime show, Police 10/7, on TV. There was quite a bit of toilet level humour but that's OK, the book wasn't a bad read.

One story concerned the trial of a gang member. The gang member had became annoyed at one of the lawyers in the court and went off his head at him. The Judge interrupted and told the gang member that he couldn't talk to the lawyer like that. The gang member said, "Sorry sir, but the cunt's an egg."

The irony being that the worst insult in the sentence was the reference to an egg.

That particular lawyer has since been elevated to the judiciary. Sometimes in the course of my work I had cause to sit in his court while he did his dignified, commanding, judicial thing. Inwardly though I was smiling recalling the gang member's appraisal of his performance. Probably just as well the judge didn't know I'd read the book.

Meanwhile back on topic...