Career women: A crime against nature?
She's trouble!
Quiz: Which of the following is an example of female infidelity? (Check all that apply.)
a) A man and a woman are in a monogamous relationship; neither one sleeps with anyone else.
b) A man and a woman are in a monogamous relationship; the man sleeps with someone else.
c) A man and a woman are in a monogamous relationship; the woman sleeps with someone else.
d) A woman, who may or may not be in a monogamous relationship, works hard at a job she enjoys.
ANSWER: If you answered c, congratulations! You are correct. If you also answered d, you are probably PUA guru and freelance internet asshole “Roissy” or one of his douchey fans. In a recent post Roissy argues, quite sincerely, that women who take their careers seriously are committing a sort of psycho-social-sexual crime against men.
In the post, Roissy quotes a reader of his who’d suggested that “female career obsession [is] a form of infidelity to the family and marrage.” Roissy seconds this opinion and goes on to argue that:
Women who place their careers front and center are committing a kind of betrayal of their sex’s biological and psychological imperatives. It’s like a big middle finger to everything that distinguishes the feminine from the masculine, the yin from the yang.
Is it possible that these women are just, you know, really into their careers? That they’re good at what they do and enjoy doing it? That they want to make a difference in the world? That they might have a family to support? Or that, you know, they simply like making a lot of money?
Of course not. For Roissy, careers are little more than psychological crutches for women who are 1) trying to distract themselves from loneliness and/or sexual boredom:
It’s quite possible that the worst offenders — the 14 hour day lawyercunts and the graduate school hermits — embrace the male-oriented rat race and achievement spectacle because it offers a welcome distraction from either spinsterly loneliness or boring beta male partners who, while intellectually are rationalized as good matches, do not viscerally excite them.
Or, 2) imagining themselves as the heroines in some glamorous romance novel:
Maybe, too, these careerist chicks see their jobs as a way to enter the world of the alpha male, to have a taste of what it would be like to be part of his life. The office cubes and doormen and glassy skyscrapers have given legions of plain janes the daily stimulation to mentally masturbate fantasy romances with the alpha males who run their companies or the alpha salesmen who greet them at the front desk with a twinkle in their eyes.
Or, 3) trying to magically ward off the case of the uglies that apparently infects each and every woman when she hits the age of 40:
When a woman’s SMV [Sexual Market Value] inevitably craters in her 40s, her career might be all she has to lift her spirits, especially if she has no husband she loves, no kids, or even just one kid who spends most of his time playing CoD or robbing convenience stores.
Of course, in Roissy’s mind, these women aren’t quite women to begin with, even before they get hit with the 40th birthday ugly stick:
[T]here is something “off” about women who are excessively devoted to their careers and to obtaining an acronymic parade of pointless credentials. Careerist shrikes are some of the most unpleasant, unfeminine women to be around. They must have more androgen receptors than normal women to be so grating to the male sensibility. Sure, they can fuck like Viagra-laced male pornstars, but as soon as you relieve yourself in them you will feel a second powerful urge to escape their aggro nastiness.
Yeah, somehow I’m guessing that urge to flee is pretty strong in these women as well, as soon as they realize that they guy they’ve just had sex with is a pretentious narcissistic windbag who hates women.
Roissy continues, revealing far more about his own sexual insecurities than about any actual career women:
The women for whom career success is their comfort and their purpose are some sort of weird, monstrous amalgam of man and woman, halfway between both worlds, their sexual polarity askew. These types tend to attract either intense short term flings with alphas or plodding marriages with dweeby, effete kitchen bitches.
Roissy is vaguely aware that feminists – not to mention pretty much anyone who isn’t a complete douchebag misogynist – might have a few issues with his theories here.
The dumbfuck feminists will naturally ask, “Why doesn’t this same theory apply to men? Aren’t they escaping sad love lives by retreating to their careers?”
Don’t you know it’s different for guys? Unlike women, men are evolutionarily programmed to be resource providers for women. It is not a betrayal of a man’s innate purpose in life to ambitiously pursue achievement and accolades. In fact, just the opposite; it’s an affirmation of that ancient purpose.
Remember this, you ungrateful career ladies: WE HUNTED THE MAMMOTH TO FEED YOU!
Posted on June 24, 2011, in alpha males, antifeminism, beta males, douchebaggery, I'm totally being sarcastic, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, PUA, reactionary bullshit, sex. Bookmark the permalink. 1,021 Comments.
Pot, kettle; kettle, pot.
Nonsense! They’re comedy gold!
Maybe you should try being a conspiracy-addled creationist with literacy problems. It might make your posts less tedious.
okay I can’t take it anymore MRAL I’m 5’2.75 and African American so most guys I know are about 5″10 easy 5″8 at the shortest, however even as a guy I’ve never bitched about my height as much as you do. Dear fucking god, the reason you’re a virgin is because of the choices you made. Putting your focus solely on academics and not developing social skills. It sucks I know I did the same thing. Take some freaking responsibility about how your life turned out. I know guys who were shorter than average in HS 5″4 and 5″5 did fine dating wise, because they had social skills and chrisima, and most importantly looked as hot as the girls they were trying to get. I had chances when I got down to 126 and had a great body, spent two hours in the gym a day. I just lacked confidence because I lacked social skills, because of the BS notion in this society that they come naturally and that smart guys are natural loners. So yeah I get it, if you had the years back you’d do it differently. It’s not a good reason, because yeah you hate everyone, again been there, but a largely component of that hate is always self-directed. Let it go.
Yes, the idea that men evolved to provide for their families and women evolved to, I don’t know, sit around filing their nails out on the savanna bears no connection to reality. In the hunter-gatherer societies that exist today, women provide something like 90% of the food. The meat brought home by hunters is mostly valuable for social bonding and trade–which is important, but everyone would starve without women’s work.
As far as I can tell, the MRA concept of history goes something like this:
Prehistory. Was exactly like “The Flintstones,” except that in addition to driving around in foot-powered stone cars, men also hunted the mammoth to feed ungrateful women. Everyone ate nothing but mammoth. Women spent their time decorating caves, eating mammoth bon-bons (that is, bon-bons made from mammoth, not enormous bon-bons, as prehistoric women at least had the sense to keep their figures), and insufficiently appreciating men.
History. Not really clear on the details, but everything good (like the Renaissance and “Dilbert” cartoons) was entirely the work of men, and everything bad (like war) was technically done by men, but was really the fault of women for nagging the men into it. Women had it way too easy, as evidenced by the fact that you occasionally read about them being allowed outside.
The 1950s. The apex of human history. Was exactly like “Leave It to Beaver,” but without flawed men like that troublemaker Eddie Haskell. The purported existence of Eddie Haskell is a feminist lie. Everything was perfect except that women had somehow acquired the nefarious ability to do things like vote and read.
The 1970s. Feminism destroyed civilization. Exactly how feminism happened is unclear; women can’t have come up with it, since they’re too stupid to have ideas, so it must have been the work of some male traitor. A mysterious and troubling epoch.
1980s-Present. Civilization still being destroyed. Any day now.
The Future. Will be exactly like the “Mad Max” movies, except that women will not be allowed to work important jobs like running Bartertown and overseeing the battles in the Thunderdome. Women will feel so bad about destroying civilization that they will apologize constantly and give men lots of blow jobs. The new world order will be a barbaric land of chaos where brute force reigns supreme, so obviously the most successful men will be friendless computer engineers. They shall have many concubines, whom they will resent for sitting on their asses eating bon-bons all day.
If people hate me because I don’t put up with bigotry and lies, well then I really can’t think of a better reason to be hated.
To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.
Elbert Hubbard
Frankly, I would think I was doing something wrong if douches like this didn’t hate me.
MRAL hates everybody, including – no, especially – himself.
Ah. “Girlfriend” in his case = “pussy when I want it.” Got it.
I only take care of myself, and I can say that grocery shopping takes several hours a week. This may or may not include time spent going to the bus stop, waiting for the bus, and riding the bus. Depends on which stores I go to. The closest two are about 8 and 15 minutes on foot, so that’s roughly a half hour that gets added every time I go. Then there’s time spent figuring out what I want to eat, reading labels (allergies), deciding if I have space for X since it’s on sale, and so on. I guess if you have a car and only ever eat frozen dinners and ramen noodles, an hour a week is accurate. And is you microwave stuff or dump soup in a pot, an hour a day might be accurate…
But not if you have to chop, hand mix, marinate, or bake anything.
My mom was a sahm for the first decade of my life. And yes, she was lazy as fuck. She just …is. And so is my brother. In fact, he’s even lazier. At least my mom could cook SOMETHING. Laziness is not a gendered condition, though it may be inherited (harharhar). I did a homestay and my host mom was a sahm to 3 kids way younger than me (plus me), and she would get up at 4am and go to bed at 1. She never stopped moving. You might say, “Well, foreign women make better wives,” but I can assure you that the prevailing opinion is “Japanese women are lazy as fuck” and that they’re “spoiled princesses who refuse to work.”
“MRAL hates everybody, including – no, especially – himself.”
Well at least I am…partly…in good company!
“Frankly, I would think I was doing something wrong if douches like this didn’t hate me.”
-Fuck MRAs
Quote is full of win it is!
Shaenon, I think you nailed it! Could I run this as a guest post?
Graham, I know, right? How can I enjoy rereading Story of O now that it’s become polluted in my brain by this asshole?
I’m just glad he didn’t call himself “Cheeseburger,” because that cuts even closer to home for me.
Sally Strange – “Women do two-thirds of the world’s work”
That claim that has been debunked. If women did 2/3 of the work don’t you think that they would be the taller stronger ones?
Men and women the world over do roughly the same amount of work.
Couch Entitlement Surprise—men do just as much work as women do.
By Joel Waldfogel
Everyone from economists and sociologists to Oprah knows that women work more than men. Their longer combined hours, at the home and at the office, stop men from taking afternoon naps on the couch and cause fights that end with men spending nights on the couch. And yet according to new study, those longer hours are a myth, because it’s just not true that women carry a heavier load.
Three economists, Michael Burda of Humboldt University in Berlin, Daniel Hamermesh of the University of Texas, and Philippe Weil of the Free University of Brussels have analyzed data from surveys in 25 countries that ask people how they spend their time. Some of the countries are rich, like the United States and Germany, some are poor, like Benin and Madagascar, and some are in the middle, like Hungary, Mexico, and Slovenia. The people surveyed were asked to fill in diaries indicating how they spend each segment of their day.
The 24 hours we all have each day can be divided into four broad activities: “market work” that is, work for pay, typically outside the house; “homework,” including housework and child care; “tertiary time,” including sleep, eating, and other biological necessities that people can do only for themselves; and the time left over, which is leisure. Leisure is not essential to survival, but we like it.
Rest is here
http://feck-blog.blogspot.com/search/label/Working-gap
I’ll admit I object to Fuck MRAs screen name, but only because I believe the course of action that her name describes would be highly inadvisable, not to mention unsatisfying.
Shaenon, if we could Like or Upvote comments here, I’d be liking and upvoting the crap out of that!
ah hahahahaaa…
Captain Bathrobe, I thought just exactly that shortly after I posted the first time and considered changing it. Just never got around to it and now it’s kinda grown on me.
:-D @Shaenon
Ami Angelwing’s version of the “History of the World” story staring White Shaft from last night is worth the look too if you haven’t seen it.
Shaenon, I think you nailed it! Could I run this as a guest post?
I would of course be beyond honored.
After being forced to listen to my tales of Manboobz, my husband says I have ruined the NWO for him, which is a cryin’ shame because the night Hulk Hogan joined was one of the highlights of his teenage years.
Roissy is an uber-CREEP. Ugh.
Nice to know he pretty much hates all women. Stay at home? You lazy gold-digger. Work? How could you put anything other than your man’s needs first?
Honestly, he writes like women are only sentient when a man is interacting with them. If we’re not servicing them in some way we just turn off, I guess, since having any needs at all (emotional, physical, financial, sexual) makes us into monsters.
Mr. Al, your blithe dismissal of the work one can put into one’s home and family is touching. You should have written that on your mother’s day card!
“Dear Mom – Thanks for the tiny amount of your life you spent raising me, I guess. Aren’t you glad I never had to be fed or clothed or cleaned up after or taken anywhere for the entire time I lived in your home? Hell, why am I even sending you a card? You lazy bitch – Mr. Al”
Roissy is a more intelligent and humorous version of the female game related and endless dating advise that has been published in the female media for decades now.
“teh eviils menz are doing what we do, oh noes!!!!!”
Ah, I can’t believe I forgot about this, but the Bureau of Labor has a pretty interesting site with annual reports on their Time Use Surveys. Mr. Al will like it because it’s the American Time Use Survey. Other people will like it because it contains a lot of information about how people spend their time. There’s one report for everyone, and one for married parents, plus a bunch of tables. Enjoy!
A dude who says all women are worthless is humorous? Not really.
Sorry, you lost me there. I couldn’t see the rest of your comment through tears of laughter.
Shaenon…brilliant.
Louie – Personally, I think both Roissy’s advice and the Cosmo equivalent for women are both pretty bad. Honestly, from what I’ve read he really isn’t any funnier or more intelligent than Cosmo (which means boring and dumb, by the way). Mainstream feminism – particularly mainstream sex-positive feminism – typically eschews both.
It’s not “teh eviils menz are doing what we do, oh noes!!!!!” it’s “shit, this is bad advice and humans shouldn’t treat other humans this way.”
Oh and Louie again – read the Waldfogel piece, very interesting. One thing I want to point out:
“While men and women spend about the same time working in rich countries, women do work more than men in poor countries. And the gap widens as countries get poorer. While in the United States, which has a per capita GNP of roughly $33,000, there is no difference between the amount of male and female work, in Benin, Madagascar, and South Africa, which have a per capita income of less than $10,000, women work one to two hours more per day than men…Many women with demanding careers tell me that it is women working full-time in the market, not women overall, who work more than comparable men. This study cannot settle that question because it does not report work time separately for people with and without market jobs. But if women with careers work more than men, while women overall work the same amount as men, then women without market jobs must work less than men. Men can use that argument to hit the couch in the afternoon. Or to end up there at night.”
So, this kind of makes me wonder, if you did the analysis based on socioeconomic status, if the result for the US would look different? Anyone know of any work looking at this?
Citation please. I gave mine.
Are you a Lamarckian? Now THAT is something that was debunked… by Darwin. Like, a really long time ago.
I think you are using a gendered definition of the word “work.” Here’s a hint: not all work is paid work.
You know what I never understand?
The constant complaints that “women these days just don’t act like women!”
If it was in my nature not to work, if I was not evolutionarily designed to work, then… why is this even a problem? Why would I want to work?
Anyway, as everyone on the blog has said already, it’s not like there was some historical period where women (other than very high-class ones) didn’t work. We may not have had the same jobs as men, but women have been working from 1940s munitions factories to 1800s sweatshops to medieval farms all the way back to putting the “gathering” in “hunting and gathering.”
I actually agree with MRAL that keeping a modern house only takes a couple hours a day–without kids. With kids, whooole new ballgame. I like kids enough as people, but in terms of realizing what they’d do to my options in life, there’s no contraception like babysitting…
Tabby
“Roissy is a more intelligent…
Sorry, you lost me there. I couldn’t see the rest of your comment through tears of laughter.”
Give me one example of female game/dating advise out of the endless drivel that has been published by women over the last three decades that is a funny, smart and on the money as roissy in dc.
“If women did 2/3 of the work don’t you think that they would be the taller stronger ones?”
Yeah, echoing Sally on that being really, really dumb. “Work” doesn’t necessarily mean lifting heavy objects and being able to reach the high shelf.
ah hahahahaaa…
Captain Bathrobe, I thought just exactly that shortly after I posted the first time and considered changing it. Just never got around to it and now it’s kinda grown on me.
I know what you mean. If you tried to change it now, you’d have to explain all over again who you were. Oh well. :)
Sally you didnt read the article.
Couch Entitlement
Surprise—men do just as much work as women do.
By Joel Waldfogel
http://www.slate.com/id/2164268/pagenum/2
Paid work and unpaid work considered, men and women do the same amount of work.
Why? Is this a competition? Roissy vs. Cosmo in the Great Humor/Dating Advice Smackdown? With Roissy representing ALL men and Cosmo representing ALL women?
What are you, 7 years old? If so, that would explain your Lamarckian take on evolution.
Well, there is a lot of (offensive and largely worthless) female “game” advice out there, but it ain’t coming from feminists:
http://pervocracy.blogspot.com/search/label/cosmocking
SallyStrange can say women do more work because she is including nebulous shit like “unpaid housework hours” and “emotional support”. While certainly work, the unmeasurable nature of it allows fymynyst idiots like Sally to pretty much assign any value they want to it… thus giving them stats like “women to 2/3rds of the worlds work…. (values assigned arbitrarily).
In reality, housework is not measurable. So I really don’t know which gender, overall, does more work. However, I think we can safely say women do not do 2/3 of the work in the world. That’s a fucking laugh.
Appeal to Nature Fallacy. *Facepalm* Seriously, who is starting to get with my plan that we add learning about that to elementary school curriculums.
@Louie, find me a study on labour that takes into account that child care goes beyond bathing and feeding for small children, who must be watched constantly. Most of these studies define childcare in such sparse terms that a parent who only met those limits for a small child would be criminally negligent. Clearly, if someone think an infant needs no care when not eating or being changed, they have never looked after an infant. Many of these studies also fail to take into account home labour such as piece work or gardening work.
“In reality, housework is not measurable.”
Which is why you gave us measurements earlier?
I can’t, but not because they may or may not exist, but because I have no interest in reading them any more than I am in reading Roissy.
What I have read of Roissy, “funny, smart and on the money” is like describing a track suit as “classy”.
@ Louie
From the article you linked to:
The factoid I referenced was specifically addressing the GLOBAL inequalities between men and women. So in fact you are not debunking anything I said, you seem to be agreeing with me.
The reason men and women are approaching parity in industrialized countries is because of the work feminists have done in making sure that is the case; the authors of the study themselves state this:
Also, it’s not clear to me whether the study was addressing paid work only, or both paid and unpaid work. Looks to me like they’re only talking about paid work.
The most recent studies still confirm that women do more household chores than men, and that if current trends in the US continue, it won’t be until 2050 that men and women actually split household work evenly.
You’re a rather pathetic little yutz, but this has been entertaining. Got anything else?
If women did 2/3 of the work don’t you think that they would be the taller stronger ones?
Actually, isn’t there some study which concluded that, while men have more natural muscle mass, women have more inherent stamina? Not every type of ‘work’ requires sheer brute strength – I imagine strength doesn’t help one much when chasing after a toddler or two all day, but I bet stamina comes in hella useful.
In reality, housework is not measurable
Actually, it kind of is, MRAL. You ask someone to keep a record of how many minutes per day they spend on various household chores, and then after, oh, I don’t know, six months, say, you crunch the numbers and average them all out.
And I remember reading not too long ago some health study that said 40 minutes of housework was equivalent to a 20-30 minute cardio workout, or something like that (my numbers could be off, what I remember clearly is that housework was equivalent to a workout). They measured how many calories were expended by people as they swept, vacuumed, etc.
Yeah, that study Louie was talking about does talk about “home work,” but as is clear from the article I linked to, their contention that housework is evenly divided between men and women is far from being non-controversial.
@ MRAL
Despite your claims of housework being impossible to quantify, numerous studies can and do quantify it. Why don’t you stop being a whining little titty-baby, use the google machine, and look some of them up? Hey, you might learn something! Remember, the other posters here are REAL LIVE PEOPLE with their own lives. They’re not here to do your homework for you.
This is clearly someone who’s never had to be involved in a conversation like so: (note: real example from my real life)
It is a weekday evening, we’ve both returned from our 40-hour a week jobs and I am cooking dinner for the two of us while he sits on the couch watching tv.
Him: Hon, the stairs really need to be vacuumed.
Me: Really? I don’t think they look bad, but the vacuum’s in the coat closet if you want it.
Next day:
Him: Hon, the stairs still really need to be vacuumed.
Me: They’re still not bothering me, but you can feel free to do it yourself, the vacuum’s still in the coat closet.
Two weeks later in the middle of an argument about something else:
Him: You suck! I can’t believe you still haven’t vacuumed the stairs!
Me: I don’t care about the damn stairs, vacuum them yourself if it’s so important to you!
I mean, why should I have to heft the damn vacuum up and down the stairs – isn’t he supposed to be the strong one? Especially when I think they look fine? But, you know, vacuuming is a woman’s *job* (nevermind that he was perfectly capable of doing it before we moved in together) and I apparently should have seen to it while cooking him a meal.
It happens. It happens with men who didn’t act like that at all until they thought they had a new maid. It happens with men who don’t mean to act like that and can realize their entitlement when it’s pointed out to them. It happens with men who swear up and down they’d never be offended if their SO made more money than them…until they do.
Shaenon’s account of history according to the MRM is fantastic.
And MRAL, you yourself quantified how much time housework takes further up this thread. I remember because I was amazed anyone would bother to do that.
how the fuck is housework nebulous? It’s fucking work. It burns calories. You can work up a sweat doing it. At least some amount of it is necessary if you don’t want to live in a cesspool.
Well, that does depend on your definition of cesspool. I’m with Quentin Crisp, who said that after the first two years the dust doesn’t get noticeably any worse.
You people are a riot, still trying to serve up a cow manure sandwich and call it angus beef. Amazing how you’ll prattle off women doing 2/3s or 80% of the worlds work like it’s gospel cause women say they do sooooo very much and men are shit assed lazy. I love how thats OK to say, oh hell its way funny. But call women lazy, nuhuhhh, that makes you a bad ole misogynist.
This is womens employment. Women make up over 70% of over 22 million State employees. So around 15 million State employees, a massive drain on the economy. Their job, well talking, moving information about, secreterial, surveys, ect. The other 30% of men working for the State, equally worthless.
Women who are well paid outside of the public sector are generally sales, presentations, banking, speculators, ect. that make up maybe 0.01% of women employed. These are the big moneymakers along with an equally low number of men maybe 0.03%. THe buy/sell your lives on the stock market, or sell foreign products. They don’t care about you.
The majority of women in the private sector are employed, (other than walmart workers) in what can only be called childcare. They’re either directly taking care of children, or doing laundry service, catering, food service, (mcDonalds), driving service, ect. It’s all basically childcare. The childcare industry grew up around women who went to work. Just in the Guv if you have 1/2 of those women employing childcare services you’ll have 7.5 million women caring for 7.5 million of those women’s children who are paid by taxpayers. What a monsterous waste.
Then of course you have the “equality” laws which basically make any US company uncompetetive. Insisting a company hire “x” amount of women, (who will want office jobs) as opposed to the dirty/dangerous jobs, that cost will be transferred to the customer. Whose going to buy a US product rather than a foreign product of the same quality if the foreign product is 1/2 price? This policy is an economy destroyer.
How do you think the US went from literally #1 in worldwide supply of almost everything to the worlds ghetto in just 60 years. Philadelphia shipyard supplied over 50% of the worlds ships at one time. State policy killed every industry in our nation. The Federal Guv is supposed to have very limited power, and all federally funding as per the constitution, is supposed to come from import and excise tax.
We now live in a Nanny State, a matriarch, and it will continue to get much, much worse. The mencession that women laughed and giggled about is nothing compared to the coming womancession. If a million women lose their jobs for the State or sales, banking, ect. another million will lose those childcare jobs of babysitting, transprtation, laundry, food, ect. And it’s coming, make no mistake about it.
Manufacturing, farming, local production, ect. is what you should have been voting for, Remember women have the vote, and all the Guv leaps to cater to your every whim. It gives them more money and more power. You should have been supporting men instead of crying to the Guv for more perks. So what will you do now? Ask for more laws to support womens economy? Drain more from what little there is left? The ball is in your court. Will you blame men when things go bad.
“The women’s suffrage movement is only the small edge of the wedge, if we allow women to vote it will mean the loss of social structure and the rise of every liberal cause under the sun. Women are well represented by their fathers, brothers, and husbands.”
– Winston Churchill
And that is exactly what has happened.
So six hours of off-and-on vacuuming, taking a long break in the middle to eat, in a nice sunlit house, is comparable to working in dangerous environments, without a break (remember, men still work all the dangerous jobs).
This is why it’s not measurable. Idiot.
Actually NWO has a point, I got crucified for saying (some) women are lazy, but it’s hunky dory for Sally to throw about bullshit statistics that say women do like 99% of the work and all the men are lazy entitled oppressors. Fuck that, and fuck fymynysm.
And women do not have more “stamina” than men. If that were true, why aren’t there any women in men’s endurance sports?
@MRAL and NWO:
How did we get from 2/3s of the work globally (yes that probably includes care of children) to 2/3s of paid jobs, to 80%, to 99%? Isn’t this the exact definition of a straw man argument?
So six hours of off-and-on vacuuming, taking a long break in the middle to eat, in a nice sunlit house,
No one spends six hours vacuuming. Stay-at-home moms spend the vast majority of their time cleaning up after, entertaining, feeding, teaching, and keeping-from-eating-oven-cleaner their kids. It’s less like being a housekeeper (which is a real job, no?) for six hours and more like being a housekeeper and daycare worker from breakfast to bedtime story.
…Also do you have more sympathy for women whose homes have poor lighting?
…Also, come on, it’s not like you work in a coal mine either. Me, I spent two years as an EMT, and after being on umpty-billion crime scenes and digging our ambulance out of the snow at 4 AM and putting people in restraints who were trying to eat my face off, I don’t know about “men still work all the dangerous jobs.”
@MRAL:
Indpendent of who has “more stamina,” women are not allowed to compete in a bunch of male sports. Talk to Ami about this, she knows much more than I.
2/3, 80%, 90%, whatever. The point of the “argument” is that women do more work that men, and it’s based on misandry, lies, and distorted statistics.
I just pictured NWO as a ventriloquist with MRAL sitting on his knee with an arm up his ass.
So around 15 million State employees, a massive drain on the economy.
Not really. Those state employees are able to buy food and clothes, go see movies, buy and operate a car, go to salons for haircuts, take vacations, pay rent/mortgage and everything else that makes the economy go.
So six hours of off-and-on vacuuming, taking a long break in the middle to eat, in a nice sunlit house, is comparable to working in dangerous environments, without a break (remember, men still work all the dangerous jobs).
This is why it’s not measurable. Idiot.
Logic fail! Some men work dangerous jobs so women’s housework doesn’t count?
What about that man coming home from his dangerous job (how many working men actually HAVE dangerous jobs? I mean, what % of the working male population are at significant risk? How does that compare to a woman’s risk?) to a clean home and a well-cooked meal and cared for children? Does that just magically not count because it was an XX-chromosomed person doing it?
I mean, what if you have two gay men where one of them is a highly paid construction worker or electrician and the other man stays home to take care of their children? Is the SAHD just a waste of space the same way a SAHM is?
2/3, 80%, 90%, whatever. The point of the “argument” is that women do more work that men, and it’s based on misandry, lies, and distorted statistics.
Prove it.
Otherwise, you’re just talking out of your trollish ass.
I didn’t “throw around” any statistics. I cited sources, and gave explanations. I referenced current research. I gave links.
This, MRAL, is why you fail. I have credibility. You don’t. Either get used to it, or stop being a whiny-ass titty baby and do some homework. For instance, you made a verifiable claim:
Rather than backing this up with an idiotic rhetorical question (are women ALLOWED in men’s endurance sports? Which endurance sports? And are we really talking about sports here, or other kinds of endurance?), why don’t you try backing it up with an actual STUDY on the relative endurance of men vs. women? I’m quite confident that such studies have been done. Oh right, you’re a lazy, entitled, whiney-ass titty baby who can’t do his own homework but expects his opinions to be respected anyway.
Hey slavey what to know a secret? I never read your comments unless their really short because they are all composed of the same garbage over and over again. Don’t you know your not suppose to recycle garbage? Didn’t they teach you that in elementary school or where they too busy indoctrining you with EVIL FEMINSM.
Another thing to keep in mind, MRAL – Most women work and do housework. The number of women who can afford a “housewife” lifestyle (excepting women staying home with small children, which is a LOT more work than just housework) is pretty vanishingly small.
When you talk about two hours a day of housework–put those two hours after the woman comes home from a full day of “real” work.
I got crucified for saying (some) women are lazy, but it’s hunky dory for Sally to throw about bullshit statistics that say women do like 99% of the work and all the men are lazy entitled oppressors
Isn’t it against the comment policy to willfully misrepresent what someone has said? I mean, I hate to be the Policy Police, but that statement really got to me for how full of Wrong it is.
Sure some women do. But they don’t dominate, and you’d think they would if they inherently were better at it.
Personally I think endurance is very specific to the individual, and neither gender can claim to have “more stamina”.
I’d like you to explain how that’s a misrepresentation, because it’s clearly not.
Okay, she said 2/3s, not 99%. Regardless, the principle is the same.
Okay, she said 2/3s, not 99%. Regardless, the principle is the same.
No, dude, it’s really not. You want it to be 99%, because that would justify your overwhelming hatred of women and mocking of women’s desire for equality. You say that the study is wrong, just because you want it to be wrong.
If you disagree with the study, then find another reputable, peer-reviewed study that refutes Sally’s. Otherwise, you’re just being a hateful little troll. Again. You can’t argue with facts.
And what would it mean for you and your view on the world if Sally is actually *right* and the study is correct?
MRAL, since housework is no work at all, why don’t you go tell your mommy that you’ll do it all for the rest of the summer? No problem, right?
@Victoria von Syrus
State employees on average with bennies make 2x as much as private employees. If 25% of you income goes to the State that means it takes 8 private sector workers to employ 1 State worker. A horrible drain.
I didn’t say housework didn’t count. You also assume all the free work men do around the house as invisible, Their work apparently doesn’t count. Ya see men also do stuff around the house.
State employees on average with bennies make 2x as much as private employees. If 25% of you income goes to the State that means it takes 8 private sector workers to employ 1 State worker. A horrible drain.
Citation needed.
I didn’t say housework didn’t count. You also assume all the free work men do around the house as invisible, Their work apparently doesn’t count. Ya see men also do stuff around the house.
That is true, you were not the person who said housework didn’t count. That part was directed at MRAL. It’s difficult to decide if I should just leave a long string of comments, addressed to each individual person I’m refuting, or if I should write one long comment including everyone.
And no one ever said men didn’t do *any* work around the house, they just said that women do *more*.
Hey slavey what to know a secret? I never read your comments unless their really short because they are all composed of the same garbage over and over again.
Me too. These trolls are a bore.
NWO does all the stuff around his house. He has to.
Off topic, I am totally blown away that we’ve got a Troll Tag Team going on. It completely decimates my theory that they all take turns, or politely avoid trolling when someone else is going at it.
@Jumbofish
The reason you don’t read my comments in full is either your attention span is minute, or I’m not one of the perfect ones who you could gush over and join in on the mutual admiration fest.
I’m not reading NWO’s comments either. There’s only so many rounds of “misplaced statistics, made-up statistics, bitter sarcasm, Rothschilds, bankers, bitter sarcasm, men=bad women=good, hatred in hatred out, bitter sarcasm, I’M NOT ANTI-SEMITIC I JUST HATE THE INTERNATIONAL BANKERS AND SOMETIMES I READ HOLOCAUST DENIAL WEBSITES, bitter sarcasm” a girl can take.
Oh shit, I left out the “arguments about who’s asking who more questions.” How could I have forgotten those?
NWO:
Lets say for the moment that you are right, that it takes 8 private sector jobs to fund the payment for 1 governmental job. Where is the money going to go, exactly? You know all those state-provided programs? The money that goes into those institutions are going to the workers who actually provide the service. Get rid of governmental jobs, and you get rid of government.
Which is of course exactly what you want, which makes you about as worthwhile to talk to as a feral racoon.
No NWO, the reason nobody reads your comments in full is that you’re very very dull.