I started thi thread asking about the data. The thread has understandably shifted into discussions about the reasons for the data. The problem is still, as I understand it, that we can't even agree on the data. Or did I miss it? Have some folks found some studies that we agree upon? Once we have that, then we can begin to argue, or discuss, what the data actually means.
While the other side believes that just because of ones gender they should be persuaded/pushed from birth to do things that pay more/less.
Simply ignoreing any underlying reason of why things are the way they are.
I've noticed a trend in your posts. They contain a lot of "why" questions. The interesting thing about "why" questions is that they are designed to automatically put people on the defensive. Why do I think the way I do and believe the things I do? My answer is simple: because.
You seem to want to fundamentally remake gender roles in society. Its is kinda scary if your answer is just "because".
Carmen813 said:There also seems to be a tendency to make assumptions about the beliefs of people who disagree with you and to lump them into groups. People are "liberal" or "conservative." That's an oversimplification and example of black & white thinking. I am conservative in some areas, liberal in others, libertarian in others, and some regard I'm sure the only term that would apply is "Carmenist."
From what you have said in this thread you clearly espouse liberal beliefs with regards to gender roles.
Carmen813 said:I do not believe my position to be superior to that of yours, or others. Attacking my beliefs will not lead me to change them. It's more likely to reinforce them. So rather than attack, could you help me understand your beliefs? Perhaps then we could have a real dialogue about this issue.
I believe men and women are different. The fact that they make different choice with regards to their career comes as no surprise. Consider this quote from my previous post
Actually, there is no evidence for either of these propositions. If women work fewer hours than men do, it appears to be because they want it that way. About two-thirds of the part-time workforce in the United States is female. According to a 2007 Pew Research survey, only 21 percent of working mothers with minor children want to be in the office full-time. Sixty percent say that they would prefer to work part-time, and 19 percent would like to give up their jobs altogether. For working fathers, the numbers are reversed: 72 percent want to work full-time and 12 percent part-time.
Women are just not as interested in a career as men. I suppose you could argue that women don't want to work full time jobs as a result of social constructs. But that is a very revealing accusations; it implies that you think work is "fun", and that people should naturally want to work. The better question is why do men want full-time jobs?
Further, see this article from forbes about what happens when women find out work is not as "fun" as they were led to believe:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larissa...llennial-women-are-burning-out-at-work-by-30/
I do not think that women should be kept out of the workplace. And they should be treated with respect when they are in it. But I see no reason to force them to have a career just like a man.
Fundamentally I believe an agenda is being pushed that was advocated by feminist, Simone de Beauvoir.
http://open.salon.com/blog/harrison...ocrats_mommy_wars_feminism_liberalism_choicesNo woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.
Now even worse. Independent women refuse to accept the natural consequences of their choices. An example, women naturally consume more health care and therefore pay more for health insurance. If they were married this would be irrelevant as it would average out with their husband. But if instead they stay single as more women are choosing now they must bare this extra cost... until obamacare makes this illegal forcing men to subsidize the health care of "independent" women.
Never said it would...
As pointed out already it would take massive societal changes.
I would say there is no reason to push someone towards or away from something simply because of gender.
Push them towards what they want to do, not what society says they should do.
If they happen to go towards what society says they should so be it, if they choose to do otherwise that good to.
Perceived inequality, discrimination, etc.
They saying of one can't do something or will be bad at something simply because of gender.
When corrected a lot goes away, but why is there even such a large difference in the fields chosen to begin with? What is the cause?
The states with large coal deposits are among the poorest in the country.
But yes certian physical activities there is a strength reason, those jobs also don't tend to pay well either.
Not counting how a lot of mining is now basically automated now so strength doesn't even matter.
Nine out of 10 Appalachian men do not receive college degrees; some don't even finish high school. The average starting salary for a coal mine worker is $60,000.
"You can come right out of high school and make $70,000 a year," said Missy Perdue, 22, a stay-at-home mother whose husband, Jeff Perdue, Jr., 22, is a miner.
Depending on the mine and the area, there could be heath concerns.
If they have a kid their might not be sufficient daycare in the area, or even if there is the hours might be longer than the daycare is open.
If the mine isn't automated enough it might require her to work in a position away from the heavy work, which might pay less. If the amount it pays isn't enough to cover the costs incurred by having use a daycare than it makes more sense not to work.
Daycare for children is not cheap, a single child averages $972 a month and for each extra child multiply that.
So men dont have to worry about health concerns?
When you salary is $60,000, spending ~$12,000 for daycare is easily affordable.
you serious?
Umm just to make sure you know what that is advocating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalworker's_pneumoconiosis
It is a very dirty industry that slowly kills its workers.
And so why do men do these jobs, but not women?why is there even such a large difference in the fields chosen to begin with? What is the cause?
And its ~$12K a year per child. In poorer areas people tend to have more children.
3 kids in a short period of time is 36k a year.
4 is 48k a year..
It gets really ugly really fast.
If your husband is bringing in $60,000 and you bring in $60,000, but have to spend $12,000 on daycare, yes this seems easily affordable.
If its not, you have pretty much made the case for traditional gender roles.
Umm just to make sure you know what that is advocating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalworker's_pneumoconiosis
It is a very dirty industry that slowly kills its workers.
The pay is that since it needs to be able to attract works that will only ever be able to work a limited number of years.
Isolated areas of higher pay also leads to increased costs of all goods in those areas relative what would normally have been the case.
And its ~$12K a year per child. In poorer areas people tend to have more children.
3 kids in a short period of time is 36k a year.
4 is 48k a year..
It gets really ugly really fast.
I would suspect the men in the regions where coal mining is present don't care much about their health.
It's a trade off of being able to provide more for their family right now in exchange for a shorter lifespan and worse overall health.
Looks like you found a reason why men and women choose different careers there. Men are more willing to sacrifice by taking crappy/hard jobs in order to provide for their family.
Traditional gender roles at work.