Equality Now

POSTED BY: 6IXSTRINGJACK
UPDATED: Monday, July 23, 2018 15:55
VIEWED: 1699
PAGE 1 of 1

6IXSTRINGJACK

Saturday, July 21, 2018 5:08 PM

Figured I'd put this in the political thread, rather than talk about it here in the General Discussions: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=62554

I'd honestly never even heard about Equality Now before, or if I did, I didn't know what it was about.

When I saw this charity putting money towards it, I thought "Oh geez... Here we go with some more SJW bullshit". I didn't know if it was anti white, or anti male, but i was sure that's what I was going to find there. When I saw that it was about gender equality, I thought I was going to have a nice read about the gender wage gap, or one of the other mythical ways that women are treated unfairly in America.

Consider me shocked when I went to the website and found that this is gender equality that I can actually get behind!!!

As they say in their first line, unlike the 1st World Problems that 3rd Wave Feminists can't stop bitching about in America, Equality Now seems to be making great strides in bringing gender equality to places where it doesn't actually already exist. Like they say on their about page... "REAL CASES, REAL CHANGE".

Imagine that.

Quote:
REAL CASES, REAL CHANGE.

Since 1992, our global network of lawyers, partners and supporters has worked on a national, regional and international level to bring about real change for women and girls everywhere.

National

We have successfully changed laws protecting rapists in many countries, including through a decade-long campaign on behalf of a 13-year-old Ethiopian girl that led to a precedent-setting ruling holding the government responsible for failing to prevent her sexual abuse and for denying her justice.

Regional

We worked with African regional partners to develop one of the most progressive and comprehensive legal instruments in history on women’s rights – the Maputo Protocol. As Secretariat for the pan-African Solidarity for African Women’s Rights Coalition (SOAWR), we’ve since helped train thousands of state officials, activists, and legal practitioners to effectively use the Protocol to uphold women’s rights across Africa.

International

Our campaign for female genital mutilation (FGM) to be viewed as a human rights violation began long before the issue reached the global agenda. Our work has inspired groundbreaking change within communities, across nations and at the highest international levels, including the adoption of a landmark UN resolution in 2012 on eliminating FGM.

Kudos to you, Can't Stop the Serenity. Thanks for finding a real thing to fight for and not SJWing up the Verse for me.

Maybe when EN gets the ball rolling on that FGM thing, we can talk about putting an end to that practice on male babies in America while we're at it too?

SIGNYM

Saturday, July 21, 2018 9:05 PM

SIX, there is (still) genuine prejudice against women. "Blinded" evaluations ... peer reviews and grant applications with the names removed, job applications with the names removed, even orchestral tryouts from behind a screen .... prove that when judged objectively, women fare at least as well as men, but that when names are added to the mix women are selected much, much less frequently than when the selection is objective.

The same goes for blacks and hispanics when it comes to job, rental, and loan applications. Even people who have "black-sounding" names ... or "black or Hispanic-sounding" voices are discriminated against over the phone. Tall white men are favored over short non-white men. Prejudice abounds, and anyone saying that it is a thing of the past is in denial.

HOWEVER, the "solution" is NOT to do "favors" for those who are discriminated against (a form of "reverse discrimination") but to devise procedures that minimize, as much as possible, the role of prejudice in hiring, housing, lending, education, and promotion. It can be done for those studies, why can't it be implemented en masse?

******

I will say that there will still be inequalities that will continue to exist between men and women: Only women can bear children; only men can provide the "Y" chromosome. Women and men, ON THE AVERAGE, behave differently. Since women are the "rate limiting" step in human reproduction, and child-bearing is a hugely risky business, women's biology is geared towards conservatism. (I don't mean political conservatism, I mean risk-reduction.) Girls are born healthier and stronger than boys, who tend to die off more quickly. Given equal resources, women live longer then men. Men tend to engage in riskier behavior, particularly in the spectrum between "showing off" and downright aggression. That's because the species can afford to lose lots of males in the process, but not so many females. Does this mean that women are NEVER violent, or that men are NEVER tender? No.

But what I think is that men and women often live in different worlds. I've spoken to enough men to have heard, more than a few times, that the first thing that a man does when entering a roomful of people is to scan which man they could take down, versus which men could take THEM down. It's a world I don't particularly want to live in. I prefer feeding people and gardening, not doing motorcycle hill-climbs.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

6IXSTRINGJACK

Sunday, July 22, 2018 1:42 AM

The examples you provide are biological differences, not inherent inequality for the sake of inequality. Also, your example of women and minorities faring "just as well or better" than men in blind tests doesn't hold water because there are studies out there that have shown that this has actually backfired in quite a few cases and has resulted in more white males being employed than women and minorities.

Since women are more likely to leave a job at some point to raise children, this is a risk that needs to be considered by a business when hiring. It's certainly not a rule, but even in 2018 the chances are that when a couple has a kid, the smart thing to do is the man continues to work because he is making more money than the woman. This wasn't the case with my brother, who's wife is a pharmacist and made 4 times as much as he did, but that's because she put in the time and hard work to get a skilled degree in a career that was in demand, rather than bitching about women not getting into STEM fields while they get a worthless Gender Studies degree themselves.

In any case, I do agree with blind resumes and testing. I think you agree with me that equal opportunity is what's important, but not at the cost of forcing equal outcome.

My point here was that Equality Now, at least on its face and it's Mission Statement, doesn't seem to be about any of these myths of gender inequality in the Western world and seem to be focusing on areas that are truly oppressive to women.

Quote:
But what I think is that men and women often live in different worlds. I've spoken to enough men to have heard, more than a few times, that the first thing that a man does when entering a roomful of people is to scan which man they could take down, versus which men could take THEM down. It's a world I don't particularly want to live in. I prefer feeing people and gardening, not doing motorcycle hill-climbs.

I don't think this is probably true on the whole, but I certainly am one of those guys. Though I don't think by brother gives stuff like that a moment of his time, I am always surveying my situation and unless I'm working or doing something that needs to be done in the middle of a room, you'll usually see me on the perimeter with my back to a wall in a strategically defendable position. When I am working, unlike some other guys who wear headphones, I don't handicap my hearing and am always ready for the unexpected. Then again, I was at one point not only attacked from behind, but beaten down by four guys within an inch of my life and stabbed in the back while I was down.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 22, 2018 2:43 AM

Quote:
The examples you provide are biological differences, not inherent inequality for the sake of inequality.

Yes, some of them

Quote:
Also, your example of women and minorities faring "just as well or better" than men in blind tests doesn't hold water because there are studies out there that have shown that this has actually backfired in quite a few cases and has resulted in more white males being employed than women and minorities.

If you provide links to your information, I'll provide links to mine and we can compare data.

In any case, I'm not arguing for discrimination of ANY sort, initial discrimination or "reverse" discrimination. People should be judged in a meritocracy, and let the chips fall where they may. (However, we should probably discuss the "metrics" used to judge people. There's a whole interesting conversation possible.) For example, just looking at med school admissions, there are far many more applicants than spaces. At some point, an extra point on your college degree is meaningless and not indicative of your "success" in med school or as a doctor. I think at that when you have selected "the best" candidates and are working on your "tier two" selections, you may as well just select by lottery.

Quote:
Since women are more likely to leave a job at some point to raise children, this is a risk that needs to be considered by a business when hiring.

Society needs to make up it's mind whether it's going to continue to disincentivize children being raised by their families, versus children being raised in some commercial/ institutional setting. Again, there's a whole long conversation possible about societal priorities.

Quote:
It's certainly not a rule, but even in 2018 the chances are that when a couple has a kid, the smart thing to do is the man continues to work because he is making more money than the woman. This wasn't the case with my brother, who's wife is a pharmacist and made 4 times as much as he did, but that's because she put in the time and hard work to get a skilled degree in a career that was in demand, rather than bitching about women not getting into STEM fields while they get a worthless Gender Studies degree themselves.

I worked thru pregnancy and sick child, and managed to advance with all that going on in the background. But it shouldn't be necessary to do that.

Also, there are a LOT of people getting worthless degrees today! It's not just related to women!

Quote:
In any case, I do agree with blind resumes and testing. I think you agree with me that equal opportunity is what's important, but not at the cost of forcing equal outcome.

Yes, I think we agree there.

Quote:
My point here was that Equality Now, at least on its face and it's Mission Statement, doesn't seem to be about any of these myths of gender inequality in the Western world and seem to be focusing on areas that are truly oppressive to women.

You mean ... that are HORRIFICALLY oppressive to women. There is still "true" oppression of women, there is also "true" oppression of men ... in fact, most people are oppressed, so maybe the answer is to reduce oppression in general.

Quote:
But what I think is that men and women often live in different worlds. I've spoken to enough men to have heard, more than a few times, that the first thing that a man does when entering a roomful of people is to scan which man they could take down, versus which men could take THEM down. It's a world I don't particularly want to live in. I prefer feeding people and gardening, not doing motorcycle hill-climbs.- SIGNY

I don't think this is probably true on the whole, but I certainly am one of those guys. Though I don't think by brother gives stuff like that a moment of his time, I am always surveying my situation and unless I'm working or doing something that needs to be done in the middle of a

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Monday, July 23, 2018 12:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
The examples you provide are biological differences, not inherent inequality for the sake of inequality.
Yes, some of them

Quote:
Since women are more likely to leave a job at some point to raise children, this is a risk that needs to be considered by a business when hiring.
Society needs to make up it's mind whether it's going to continue to disincentivize children being raised by their families, versus children being raised in some commercial/ institutional setting. Again, there's a whole long conversation possible about societal priorities.

This is not a Society decision. This is a Family decision.
Few Families think that Society should make their Family and Child-rearing decisions, overriding Parental decisions.
Only dictatorial Society Overlords believe that they should make all of the Family decisions for Families they are not party to, and have all Families succumb to their decisions, their Rule. Most Families emigrated to America to evade this Societal Control.

Um, you change feeing to feeding in the quote of your post, but not in the original post?

SIGNYM

Monday, July 23, 2018 3:09 AM

Quote:
This is not a Society decision. This is a Family decision.

Society already HAS decided. That's why so many women aren't having children, and why so many children are being raised in daycare. The question isn't whether society can (or should) decide, the question is whether society will change its decision. I'll explain more later but busy now.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

SIGNYM

Monday, July 23, 2018 3:51 PM

Quote:
Soiety needs to make up it's mind whether it's going to continue to disincentivize children being raised by their families, versus children being raised in some commercial/ institutional setting. Again, there's a whole long conversation possible about societal priorities.- SIGNY

This is not a Society decision. This is a Family decision. Few Families think that Society should make their Family and Child-rearing decisions, overriding Parental decisions.- JSF

Society already HAS decided. That's why so many women aren't having children, and why so many children are being raised in daycare. The question isn't whether society can (or should) decide, the question is whether society will change its decision. I'll explain more later but busy now.- SIGNY

JSF, people make their decisions in the context of a larger society, they don't decide in a vacuum. When and whether to have children depends very much on how much it "costs".

There several societal and economic forces which affect birthrate and child-rearing.

The first is Social Security and urbanization: When families lived on farms and there was no Social Security, children were a net asset: They could help on the farm, and they provided for the parents' old-age security. Urbanization made children more expensive and Social Security made them less necessary.

And then there is the constant focus on "money", individualism, and "self fulfillment/ empowerment". Looking at this from a woman's POV, IF YOU ASPIRE TO THE MIDDLE CLASS LIFESTYLE (the one that's constantly being pushed at you with every advertisement promoting individual overconsumption as the means to "happiness") what's the point of having children? There is an unbreakable thread: If society grants you power (and "happiness") based on your access to money, and having children reduces your access to money and makes you dependent on an indirect source (your husband) and sucks up your money and your time/ ability to work and be promoted ... why have children? It's a fundamental conundrum.

There is real work involved in "women's work": bearing and raising children; caring for young, sick, or elderly relatives; making and maintaining a home. Society has depended on this work being done "for free" .. essentially disempowering any "home-maker" from primary access to money. Is it any wonder that so many choose a different path?

Quote:
... you change feeing to feeding in the quote of your post, but not in the original post?

Yes I did. It was a typo that made my post unclear. I'll change it in the original too.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Monday, July 23, 2018 3:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
This is not a Society decision. This is a Family decision.
Society already HAS decided. That's why so many women aren't having children, and why so many children are being raised in daycare. The question isn't whether society can (or should) decide, the question is whether society will change its decision. I'll explain more later but busy now.

Individual wymin have decided to not bear offspring. Individual mothers or parents have decided to not raise and nurture their offspring.
They have not made the decisions for all those who choose the opposite.

SIGNYM

Monday, July 23, 2018 3:55 PM

Quote:
This is not a Society decision. This is a Family decision. = JSF

Society already HAS decided. That's why so many women aren't having children, and why so many children are being raised in daycare. The question isn't whether society can (or should) decide, the question is whether society will change its decision. I'll explain more later but busy now.- SIGNY

Individual wymin have decided to not bear offspring. Individual mothers or parents have decided to not raise and nurture their offspring.
They have not made the decisions for all those who choose the opposite. -JSF

"... people make their decisions in the context of a larger society, they don't decide in a vacuum. When and whether to have children depends very much on how much it "costs"."

Society decides hope much it "costs".

Individuals make decisions based on what society "rewards" and "punishes" ... they tend to do things that are rewarded, and avoid things that are punished. To do otherwise is irrational. But it's society that sets the rewards and punishments.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876