I’ll give Sofia, the antifeminist bloggress behind the blog Sofiastry, credit for one thing: unlike a lot of Men’s Rightsers, she doesn’t deny that there is a wage gap between men and women. She just thinks that it’s justified – that women should be paid less.
Why? Well, I admit I don’t quite understand her explanation, which has something to do with women getting worse grades in school, working less, and, well, whatever the hell she’s trying to say here:
women who are likely seen in executive and higher-earning positions are estrogenically flawed in their lack of sufficient desire to prioritize family life. Its the equivalent of a man who has no creative, intellectual or ambitious drive — all hallmarks of testosterone.
Oh, and because, like Barbie, women think that math class is tough:
can it not simply be reduced to the fact that the average man has more of of an aptitude for finance and numbers than the average woman?
No, I’m pretty sure it can’t.
In a followup post, Sofia raised a critical issue that she somehow had overlooked in her earlier analysis: women are a bunch of blubbering crybabies.
I couldn’t count on one hand the number of times a female co-worker cried on the job (myself included), but I couldn’t name a single male (homosexuals excluded & even then…). Women are more emotional, more likely to take days off for such reasons (or no reason) and quantifiably put in less hours on the job. Depending on the field, I’d also wager that women are less likely to revolutionize an industry or make the same amount of exceptional contributions men do.
Seriously, gal. Don’t be a bunch of Lady-Boehners. Stop all of your sobbing! (Oh, oh oh.)
Ok, Pecunium, now you’re making me sad I lost my Russian! Yes, it was a one semester early-morning high school class, but I at least could read Cyrillic out loud and sing the alphabet song. Ah, Beh, Ve, Geh, Deh, Yeh, Yull, Jeh, Zeh, E, E-crekya, Ka, El, Em, En, Oh, Pey, Yer, Esta-hoo-hah-stah-something, this is where I lose it… I do remember that you have to go through the American alphabet song twice to get through the letters, and it ends with “Etta Ruski alphabet, das va danya tvaristi.” All of which I’ve probably misspelled.
I remember *loving* how pretty it was to write in cursive in Cyrillic – I should learn again!
P.S. “I’m not one of *those* Libertarians!” sounds a whole fucking lot like “I’m not one of *those* Christians!” from where I’m sitting.
David, I’m sending you to the other side of the Mississippi.
Insert angry face with tongue.
Rutee: So in essence it’s okay for women to attack and insult men because men are privileged and misandry doesn’t exist, however men are not allowed to do the same because that makes them misogynists. Is that it?
“Hengist, two observations:
1. It’s not all about your father and his family. Your experience and your subjective evaluation of it isn’t determinative of other people’s.”
I brought it up once in response to somebody saying, essentially, that people who work longer hours are stupid and inefficient – that was cleared up afterwards. Then again after cynickal’s response that the reason my father did so was because he didn’t like me and didn’t want to see me. Which is a pretty shitty and ignorant thing to say, but of course nobody batted an eyelid because she’s “one of the gang”.
2. It’s truly heart-warming that your father did “his damnedest” (only his subjective damnedest, not the objective damnedest) and how he wasn’t perfect, but you still consider him a hero despite those flaws. Did your mother enjoy a similarly lenient standard? Do women in your life? Or are they expected to meet some insane standard of perfection, like taking care of others 24/7 with no weekends or holidays? Being full-time mothers AND wage-earners, while the men’s obligations to their family are considered discharged merely by having a job, and playing with the kiddies once a week is pure gravy? (Sorry to pry, but hey, you brought it up.)”
What the… where would you get that? Funnily enough it’s completely false. Although I respect my father for what he did, I’ve always been a lot closer to my mother. She was like a friend, whereas he was more like my boss. And where did I say ANYTHING about holding women to an “insane standard of perfection”? I feel like you’re arguing with somebody in your head who happens to have the same name as me, or something…
You’re about as sharp as a spoon, aren’t you?
Misandry is amazingly limited. ABout the only claims actually born out by the evidence are a *small* disadvantage in the criminal courts (Specifically criminal, and it’s in sentencing differences; women get roughly 10% lighter sentences. Women judges are the most gender equal, so I wouldn’t go whining about how it’s feminists’ fault either), and historically, the draft (Because the draft is a complete nonissue now, this is strictly historical). Worldwide, there are also a few countries that still have conscription policies, and that also gender those conscription policies. Other than that, claims of ‘misandry’ aren’t really born out by the evidence. Even hiring gaps in specific feminine oriented fields such as wait staff or nursing are accompanied by a glass elevator effect, and they’re both weaker and less widespread than hiring gaps that advantage men
None of this means that it is okay to be sexist against men. What it means is that being sexist against men is a substantially smaller problem. Unless I am a prosecutor, jurist, defense attorney, or judge, there is more or less nothing I can do to perpetuate a massive problem against men, and even if I did discriminate it would be a drop in the ocean. You have a much wider society that adores and advantages you for your cock. There’s just nothing I can do to turn that tide back, even if I were so inclined, and I’m not. I’m not inclined to that *because it’s not okay still*. It’s the same reason I don’t use the word “dick” as an insult. It’s not as bad as the c-word, but it’s still a gendered insult.
Strikethrough tags apparently do not work. That’s a shame.
Paying attention to wider cultural narratives about parenthood, I imagine. I know you guys aren’t actually good at this, but the short version is that men get praised as awesome fathers for amazingly small amounts of effort put into the actual child rearing segment (Regardless of whether or not the mother works similarly)
Rutee: “None of this means that it is okay to be sexist against men.” Good to know. So claiming that men are lazier and less efficient in the workplace… okay or not?
Paying attention to wider cultural narratives about parenthood, I imagine. I know you guys aren’t actually good at this, but the short version is that men get praised as awesome fathers for amazingly small amounts of effort put into the actual child rearing segment (Regardless of whether or not the mother works similarly)
I should say men who work full-time AND raise children _should_ be praised as awesome fathers. Mothers who do the same should be praised equally. You’re saying that’s not the case?
Also, your whole argument hinges on taking it for granted that women are some kind of oppressed underclass, which outside feminist circles is debatable at best, for the western world anyway.
NWOslave:
so, let me understand. A giant underclass, working at poverty level wages, is unable even to breed without fear that they’ll lose their jobs. Since there’s no social services or welfare, these poor, angry, destitute people with the majority of children and population will look up to those with money, who get to have sick days and go to doctors and have vacations and spend time with their newborn children and…
well, to me, the answer ends in rage, fire, and guillotines, but believe whatever you want.
You want a strict non-tree-hugging reason to have welfare? Here it is: it keeps the underclass distracted. It makes them feel like they’re part of the system, it makes them feel indebted. Even if they become entitled asses, they’ll still fight to defend the current system because it feeds them. If the government doesn’t feed them, and the jobs don’t feed them… then they’ll kill everyone.
You know where we get most of our soldiers? Poverty-ridden households. We dole out some welfare and in return get fanatical, generational loyalists to the state and to the State system. Welfare is a brilliant scam, designed to keep the underclass from rising up and murdering those above.
Marx’s theories on how to run a society were ultimately bullshit, but the problems he articulated in capitalism were–and are–very real.
COME AT ME BRO.
It’s conversations like this that make me proud to be a socialist, because being on the side against murdering, starving, and hating people gives a nice warm fuzzy feeling. Also, you know what, I don’t care about the “economy” for any reason other than a possible net human benefit. If it isn’t doing that, fuck it, tank it, it is useless to us anyways. Why should the poor care if the rich get fucked if the poor get fucked either way? Oh noes, poor poor CEOs whatever shall they do if they have to treat workers with basic human rights and dignity.
Additional fun fact, the US is the only developed country without at least some guaranteed paid parental leave.
PS, All anti-choicers hate women, some of them are just better at lying about their motives. You want to deny someone rights over their own body? You want to deny them opportunity to exercise bodily autonomy and basic self direction? If so, then you hate them. Plain and simple. All protests to the contrary are totally unconvincing.
So in essence it’s okay for women to attack and insult men because men are privileged and misandry doesn’t exist, however men are not allowed to do the same because that makes them misogynists. Is that it?
What do you mean attack and insult men? What specific things are you referring to? o:
NWO, you don’t believe there should be a paid maternity leave? I guess it’s no problem for you, since you’ll never go through childbirth. I’ve done it twice and it took every bit of six weeks to recuperate enough to work. They were uncomplicated deliveries, too. Mothers that have cesarean births need even longer to recover. The time right after delivery is also the best time for babies to be breastfed, since it gives them their immune systems a jump start. This could benefit the company because the mother won’t have to take off work as often for ear infections and other illnesses babies and toddlers get frequently. Do you have the same problems with paid funeral leave or people that take a paid leave to care for a sick parent?
What, as if it’s inherent to gender? No, it’s not. If it’s true, it’s only true because women have less margin to fuck up in business. It’s like saying white people are more likely to do drugs than almost any minority; it’s true, sure, but it misses the reason why, and that’s the fact that minorities get away with that bullshit less. It’s not that white people are just bigger druggies, they are just substantially less likely to be punished, and punished severely. Same with men, especially men with middle class status in the workplace.
Should be, or are? Because a dad gets praises for ‘babysitting his own kids’ if he works. Mothers get shit talked regardless of effort spent with kids if they have a job. In the real world, they’re not praised remotely equally for equal work. A mother has to be a stay at home mom who devotes herself entirely to the kids to be a good mom, and a dad just has to play catch with their sons every so often. That’s what happens *right now*, and that’s what I said is the case.
I substantiated my claim that we were already. You didn’t contest it then, and I doubt you suddenly have evidence against it now. Of course, you’re an MRA, mras don’t operate off of the evidence. Your movement would be fucked if it did that.
Ah, that was Luke, not you.
http://manboobz.com/2011/09/14/stop-your-sobbing-or-expect-to-get-paid-less-ladies/comment-page-2/#comment-60169
That’s just simple substantiation of some of the economic benefits of being male, as well as political. There are literally dozens of studies who’s findings all support that women are the underclass. Also, you’re in feminist circles now, bucko, so according to you I should be shoving the burden of proof on you anyway. But I’m nice. In seriousness, if you seriously want to claim women aren’t the oppressed gender, sources, nao. You’ll lose, but I need to know which precise studies or articles to grab to disprove your shit.
And protip: Don’t try the CONSAD report. On top of being piss poor scholarship in an attempt to erase the wage gap, it fails. It only finds a smaller one.
I should say men who work full-time AND raise children _should_ be praised as awesome fathers. Mothers who do the same should be praised equally. You’re saying that’s not the case?
You need to ask this on a thread about a post opining that working women are “estrogenically flawed in their lack of sufficient desire to prioritize family life” and “the equivalent of a man who has no creative, intellectual or ambitious drive”? A thread where one poster charmingly describes mothers as “lazy, arrogant couch potatoes who often sit around and expect things to come to them because of their vagina” and whose advice to women who want to work is “don’t shit out womb turds”? (This is a guy with a working mom who supports him financially, by the way.)
No, I’d say there’s not a lot of praise for women who work full-time and raise children. A bunch of MRAs piled on this very thread to argue that women who do both are bad workers and bad women.
MRAL: That’s not how you use misogyny. You pretend it doesn’t exist. You pretend you aren’t a misogynist.
You argue that your hatred of women is justified.
Then you argue that programs to recitify harms against women aren’t designed to balance the equation, but are rather the expression of misandry.
So, explain to me how any of the programs you say are “misandric” are, at root, based on a hatred of men.
I’ll wait.
Is someone who hates men egaging in misandry? Yes.
Is someone who hates women a misogynist? Yes.
But you know what, neither of those words is limted to one single definition. That’s the amazing power of connotation.
Let’s look at the word, fuck. It means “to have sex”.
But when you said, “Fuck you, Pecunium”, I didn’t really think you were offering me a night of carnal bliss. If you were, I’m flattered, but I’m straight, and it wouldn’t be that much fun for either of us.
So words have multiple denotational meanings, as well as multiple connotational meanings. You want to ignore all of those, except the one that lets you bash people who disagree with you.
Which means this little piece of sophistry you are using, to take someone who is being rude to you, and pretending they hate all men; it may make you feel better, but it’s not, at root, any better than NWO pretending that he’s answered questions because he’s typed someone’s name and then babbled about how the Illuminati has been telling 14 year olds to come on to him so they can have him thrown in prison for opposing their plans.
HengistRutee: “None of this means that it is okay to be sexist against men.” Good to know. So claiming that men are lazier and less efficient in the workplace… okay or not?
Depends on why, and how, the case is being made.
I should say men who work full-time AND raise children _should_ be praised as awesome fathers. Mothers who do the same should be praised equally. You’re saying that’s not the case?
Depends on what you mean by, “not the case”. Should they be praised the same? Yes. Are they? no.
Men who play catch on the weekends are treated as great parents. If they take the effort to do something else durin the week, they are often treated as the second coming of Doctor Spock.
A woman who has a career, and is actively trying to get ahead (even when she doesn’t put in the sort of mono-maniacal devotion to it a lot of fathers do), is shamed for it, called a bad mother. To add insult to injury she is denied promotions because she, “spends too much time with the children.”
If she hires a nanny, she is uncaring.
A single father who hires a nanny is, “looking after the best interests of the child.”
So, while it should be, it ain’t.
Anybody who quotes Carson is not on the same side as right-wing libertarians. He’s a mutualist, and so he explicitly self-identifies as a socialist (though an individualist anarchist rather than a collectivist/class warfare anarchist). He has more in common with my own political lineage (anarcho-communism) than the libertarian right.
There really is no pleasing everyone when you’re a mom. If you work outside the home, you’re selfish for putting your career in front of your children. When you take off work for a sick child, you’re a slacker at work. If you hire a nanny, you’re pawning your child off on someone and not really raising your own child. If you quit work to stay home with your kids, you’re lazy for not having a job. If you don’t devote every minute of every day to entertaining your child, you’re a lazy mom. If you devote every minute of every day to your children, then you are a smothering, helicopter mom with no life of her own.
In addition to all of the societal pressures for mothers, you’re also expected to cook amazing food, keep a spotless house, and be a sex goddess for your husband. Single moms have everything even harder, and people scorn them no matter what they do. Fathers don’t face nearly the amount of pressure mothers do. If women actually were crybabies at work, which they’re not, it’s very understandable. They should be upset about the way things are.
Not if I’m insulting a singular person. Which I am, snowflake.
Or if you read both sentences of my post and had a minimum amount of reading comprehension.
Some say the world is flat! Experts disagree!
“Should be, or are? Because a dad gets praises for ‘babysitting his own kids’ if he works. Mothers get shit talked regardless of effort spent with kids if they have a job. In the real world, they’re not praised remotely equally for equal work. A mother has to be a stay at home mom who devotes herself entirely to the kids to be a good mom, and a dad just has to play catch with their sons every so often. That’s what happens *right now*, and that’s what I said is the case.”
I’m curious about this. Can you point to one article, opinion piece or blog post or something in the mainstream media (not MRA or feminist source) which praises dads for spending minimal time with kids, or which condemns mothers for having a career? Because it’s not been my experience at all, and frankly sounds like an urban legend of which you’ve convinced yourself.
But I’m nice.
HAHAHA, that was a good one.
In seriousness, if you seriously want to claim women aren’t the oppressed gender, sources, nao. You’ll lose, but I need to know which precise studies or articles to grab to disprove your shit.
And protip: Don’t try the CONSAD report. On top of being piss poor scholarship in an attempt to erase the wage gap, it fails. It only finds a smaller one.
Well you just answered my question. I could just play your game, and claim that all the studies you cite are flawed, biased, whatever, just as you claim about everything that doesn’t agree with your world view. In the end, neither one of us is convinced of anything. But I would like to see you argue some of your points outside this echo chamber, clique environment.
Women get paid less than men yet still have have a greater share of the wealth. There is no wage gap between men and women with no children. It is a personal choice by women to earn less. FACT.
Buttman, are you saying you agree with MRAL’s solution for women to stop “shitting out womb turds”? Do you think it’s fair that fathers don’t have the same problems juggling work and family life as mothers?
Do you think it’s fair that 90% of all child support, alimony, welfare, charity, etc go to women? It more than equals out in their favour.