SJW Courses and Potential Damage?

[Renegade Vile]

Then I guess men have no reason to grumble that, since them pesky females started taking over [insert previously male-dominated profession], wages have stagnated. :-) Good to know.

You're going to have to elaborate on that, because I'm afraid that went right over my head.

[Lilias]

You're going to have to elaborate on that, because I'm afraid that went right over my head.

If you haven't heard anyone (usually hailing from a heavily male-dominated profession, like tech repairs or construction) candidly complain that they aren't making as good money as they used to, because the women will do it for less... you will, at some point. Also known as devaluation of female work.

[Renegade Vile]

If you haven't heard anyone (usually hailing from a heavily male-dominated profession, like tech repairs or construction) candidly complain that they aren't making as good money as they used to, because the women will do it for less... you will, at some point. Also known as devaluation of female work.

I haven't heard that because at least here in Belgium, the wages are equal. It is illegal have different wages for the same job based on anything but your diploma, years worked or any negotiations that were done during contract signing (and even that happens less than it used to because a lot of companies have started normalizing their wages in an effort to push down employee costs...). For example, I have a female colleague, a programmer, that does the exact same work I do. She gets paid exactly the same, minus the bonus I've gotten for having worked a year more than her. Same education, same background, same job, same wage, one year behind. As far as I can tell, the same holds for other women that work there. Maybe this is a US-specific thing that I really am just misinformed on, but from my own experience here, I just don't see it, or even hear complaining about it apart from very radical feminists who have come out saying they want women to earn more than men because it is their biological right (they're a rather disturbed minority...).

Regardless, this article isn't really presenting anything substantial beyond continually admitting that the factors I mentioned are factors and not really giving any evidence that the pay drop is because women have become the dominant workforce gender. I'm going to need more than that to see the correlation, especially since I've read that wages across the board in many countries are falling or - in the case of Belgium - wages have remained the same and it's the taxes that are skyrocketing. This across both genders. The article also keeps mentioning that the wages in various jobs are lower but it never seems to analyze these figures, unless the sources do but I don't have the time right now to check those out (I will when I can if you say they actually do have that information).

Regardless, we're going off-topic again, I think.

[Lilias]

I haven't heard that because at least here in Belgium, the wages are equal. It is illegal have different wages for the same job based on anything but your diploma, years worked or any negotiations that were done during contract signing

And there exactly is the problem (and all sorts of other problems): that laws aren't guaranteed to be enforced. In both countries where I have work experience, the law prescribes equal pay, and in both there is an actual wage gap that 'choices' don't account for. Perhaps the laws are adhered to better in Belgium, or perhaps you haven't noticed because it doesn't affect you. Either way, your experience is not a universal standard.

Now back to the regularly scheduled whachamacallit. :-)

[Renegade Vile]

And there exactly is the problem (and all sorts of other problems): that laws aren't guaranteed to be enforced. In both countries where I have work experience, the law prescribes equal pay, and in both there is an actual wage gap that 'choices' don't account for. Perhaps the laws are adhered to better in Belgium, or perhaps you haven't noticed because it doesn't affect you. Either way, your experience is not a universal standard.

True, but if it were such a massive problem, you'd think I'd notice it, no? Especially given that the majority of people who work where I do (a technology-based company no less, so all highly educated workers) are actually female. But what is the cause for this gap? The article and you both prescribe it to gender, but neither seem to give any real facts to back up that gender is all that is involved. One of their examples is computer science, which used to be female-dominated (I assume they are referring to when computer science was primarily using typewriters quite a few decades ago?) but when men began to dominate the field, wages went up and "it became more prestigious" (no idea how you objectively gauge that). I am pretty certain that that massive wage increase happened because the field literally exploded into probably one of the most important fields for businesses today. If you don't have someone skilled, happy and at least reasonably well-paid/educated doing your infrastructure or writing your code, you won't get very far if that program is key in your business; man or woman. Because of that importance and the rising complexity, it seems much more plausible that the wages went up not because the workforce grew a penis, but because that workforce became more important.

That's just one example, but that's what I mean by wanting to know if they actually looked at both sides of the coin (such as: have wages for male-dominated fields gone down too? If so, why? If not, why?) and if they interpreted the date they collected from every angle they could come up with?

Now back to the regularly scheduled whachamacallit. :-)

No-one wants to take a stab at the number of SJWs rampant *frowns*. I will forever be bereft an answer.

[Lilias]

You'll have to go through the research for those answers. No shortcuts to anywhere worth getting at, I'm afraid. :-)

[Renegade Vile]

You'll have to go through the research for those answers. No shortcuts to anywhere worth getting at, I'm afraid. :-)

Okay?

[Pumpkin Seeds]

One can look at professions like nursing to see the effect of men in a female dominated field.  Also the title change men are associated with in fields such as chef vs cook or professor vs teacher.

[Renegade Vile]

One can look at professions like nursing to see the effect of men in a female dominated field.  Also the title change men are associated with in fields such as chef vs cook or professor vs teacher.

Female professors are called teachers in the US? Or am I misinterpreting what you mean? As far as I know, the title professor is a very different one from teacher, at least over here.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Professors are stereotypically considered men whereas teachers are considered female.

[Renegade Vile]

Professors are stereotypically considered men whereas teachers are considered female.

The US is weeeeird.

[TheGlyphstone]

The US is weeeeird.

What do you think it's like from the inside... ;D

(Though worth noting that is the 'stereotype'. as in the stereotypical professor is a man. Female professors do actually get called professor, they aren't denied the title.)

[Renegade Vile]

What do you think it's like from the inside... ;D

(Though worth noting that is the 'stereotype'. as in the stereotypical professor is a man. Female professors do actually get called professor, they aren't denied the title.)

Ah, okay, that makes more sense. If it's just a stereotype, what is the problem? I'm sure most people know it's just a stereotype.

[TheGlyphstone]

I'm not sure. But I suppose it has some correlation - male teachers at the pre-university level are far rarer than female teachers, and male professors outnumber female professors at the collegiate/university level.

[Renegade Vile]

I'm not sure. But I suppose it has some correlation - male teachers at the pre-university level are far rarer than female teachers, and male professors outnumber female professors at the collegiate/university level.

And this is attributed to gender-bias?

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Stereotypes have serious consequences.

[TheGlyphstone]

For example, one unrelated stereotype that intersects unfortunately with this one, the stereotypical child molester is also male. So a certain, if subtle, undercurrent gets laid in societal membranes that a man who spends lots of time alone with groups of young children feels 'off', unless he is coaching them in athletics (because gym teachers/coaches are almost always male, as direct contrast to classroom teachers). Thus very few men go into academic teaching at the elementary/primary level, because that is seen as something women do and a male in that environment becomes an oddity.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

And women are always considered to be "natural" caretakers for children.  People generally feel safer leaving their child with a woman over a man, for no true reason.

[Doomsday]

I'd rather be a social justice warrior than a status quo warrior. Sargon of Akkad is gross.

[Lustful Bride]

I'd rather be a social justice warrior than a status quo warrior. Sargon of Akkad is gross.

I'd rather be a Social Activist and actually work to help others, instead of throwing tantrums and declaring all those who don't agree with me as brainwashed by the patriarchy, government, church, etc.

I'm not speaking against you D, *hugs* I like you and your a good person.  ;D

[Renegade Vile]

Stereotypes have serious consequences.

Some do, though not all I'm sure.

For example, one unrelated stereotype that intersects unfortunately with this one, the stereotypical child molester is also male. So a certain, if subtle, undercurrent gets laid in societal membranes that a man who spends lots of time alone with groups of young children feels 'off', unless he is coaching them in athletics (because gym teachers/coaches are almost always male, as direct contrast to classroom teachers). Thus very few men go into academic teaching at the elementary/primary level, because that is seen as something women do and a male in that environment becomes an oddity.

That's certainly the case here too. Not sure if it's because of that stereotype, but male teachers at primary school level are in the minority.

And women are always considered to be "natural" caretakers for children.  People generally feel safer leaving their child with a woman over a man, for no true reason.

For no true reason, provided the man knows how to take care of a child. If they're doing a job like that or are babysitting, then it's unfair to assume they can't, but there are more men that have no idea how to take care of a baby, for example, than there are women. It's not a matter of ability though, more just a matter of opportunity. For most of a male's youth, we don't really care all that much about babies and children, so we don't really look into what they entail. This doesn't go for everyone of course, I know plenty of women who had no interest in babies when they were children either, but there's still a difference there between the two. Now, as for older children, there the stereotype really is harmful since there's really no reason anymore to think a man can't take care of a child.

I'd rather be a social justice warrior than a status quo warrior. Sargon of Akkad is gross.

As lady Lustful Bride said, I'd rather be a social activist. Social justice warriors do nothing worthwhile. At all. they don't even really point out problems in society in a good way, because even when they're right, they present their case in such a horrendous fashion that they're unlikely to garner any real support from anyone. As for Sargon, he's anything but a status quo warrior. Quite a few videos of his are on progressive matters such as the issue with religious fundamentalism, lethal racism, sexism and the like in other countries, as well as places in the US, etc. Just because he's not progressive about everything on the face of the Earth doesn't mean he advocates living close-minded and hugging one's Bible (just dabbling in some mirth and hyperbole here, I know that's not exactly what you meant).

[Lustful Bride]

As lady Lustful Bride said, I'd rather be a social activist. Social justice warriors do nothing worthwhile. At all. they don't even really point out problems in society in a good way, because even when they're right, they present their case in such a horrendous fashion that they're unlikely to garner any real support from anyone. As for Sargon, he's anything but a status quo warrior. Quite a few videos of his are on progressive matters such as the issue with religious fundamentalism, lethal racism, sexism and the like in other countries, as well as places in the US, etc. Just because he's not progressive about everything on the face of the Earth doesn't mean he advocates living close-minded and hugging one's Bible (just dabbling in some mirth and hyperbole here, I know that's not exactly what you meant).

To be fair he also takes it too far sometimes and bogs himself down in the stereotypical 'Atheist with a stick up his ass" and rages at anything religious.

Which is not really being an Atheist, just an Anti Theist and that gives a bad name to other atheists.

*has fun sitting on the fence* It lets me see everything! And realize how bad the world is  :'(

[Renegade Vile]

To be fair he also takes it too far sometimes and bogs himself down in the stereotypical 'Atheist with a stick up his ass" and rages at anything religious.

He does? He's usually only raging against fundamentalists. Religious fundamentalism isn't good in -any- circumstance. Religion can be good in a lot of circumstances. It's like with Islam, he's a vocal opponent to Islamists, not Muslims.

Which is not really being an Atheist, just an Anti Theist and that gives a bad name to other atheists.

*has fun sitting on the fence* It lets me see everything! And realize how bad the world is  :'(

I'm on that fence too for most things. People may call us cowards, but it's cozy up here.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I think Vile you just pointed out your own stereotype and the danger of them.

As you pointed out before stereotypes are fine if people recognize them as stereotypes.  Yet here your own stereotype is presented, women being more comfortable with children, and you then attempt to rationalize that stereotype.  This is where stereotypes become dangerous because everyone rationalizes them.  Human beings are smart and most have the self-image of being intelligent.  People recognize that holding a belief about someone else without some sort of supporting argument, no matter how weak, is stupid.  Therefore people rationalize their belief and hence their stereotype.  Here you have done this with women, unfairly putting on them the burden of natural child care experts.

[Renegade Vile]

I think Vile you just pointed out your own stereotype and the danger of them.

As you pointed out before stereotypes are fine if people recognize them as stereotypes.  Yet here your own stereotype is presented, women being more comfortable with children, and you then attempt to rationalize that stereotype.  This is where stereotypes become dangerous because everyone rationalizes them.  Human beings are smart and most have the self-image of being intelligent.  People recognize that holding a belief about someone else without some sort of supporting argument, no matter how weak, is stupid.  Therefore people rationalize their belief and hence their stereotype.  Here you have done this with women, unfairly putting on them the burden of natural child care experts.

Yes and no. I didn't say that the stereotype was a good one, I was just explaining why I can understand the reluctance some people would have with handing very young children over to the care of grown men without credentials. Rationalizing isn't a bad thing if used to recognize a stereotype, and then use that to remind oneself that sometimes they're about as wrong as possible.

Now, as for "putting a burden on women", your average woman (yes, average) has evolutionary tools that make it far easier for her to learn how to care for very young children. That doesn't mean men can't do it, and that doesn't mean all women are good at it, but if you only look at differences between brains (such as women having a large area of the brain for empathy, which is very important in the earliest years of a child), then if you take your average man and your average woman, the average woman will learn these things quicker and more easily. Now let me stress again that the average man and average woman does not exist. But there is a reason why these things come easier for a lot of them. If I look at the number of women I've met and how handling a child is like flipping a switch for them, while for a lot of men, it takes time, there is a disproportion there.
As a new father, I can speak of this myself. I'm perfectly comfortable with changing diapers, feeding, carrying, holding, putting to sleep, etc; but it took time, whereas my wife just picked these things up like they were nothing.
Again, this difference might not be massive, but it's there. And on top of that, I'm not advocating that woman should get all responsibility with children, not in the slightest. It needs to come from both parents, equally, and that includes the dirty diapers. So I'm not saying that this "burden" should go to women by default. I'm only saying these things come easier for more women than they do men.

Evolution may have shaped men and women differently, but nothing says we have to fulfill those or any other roles, but you also can't just close your eyes and pretend these differences aren't there.

You also ignored the fact that I stated the stereotype can be an understandable apprehension (it's one's own children, I think we're entitled to some irrational over-protectiveness, no?) only in the case of very young children. Once they hit the age of two, I've never heard of any real reason to think any guy can't be trusted with taking care of them.