International Women's Day 2008 (1 Viewer)

Buzzo said:
I copy and pasted it from one of the National Women's Council of Ireland's main pages, thought it was pretty sketchy, but posted it anyway coz I was a bit preoccupied. Shamer.
Morto. There will be blood tomorrow.
 
yis all know about the feminist walking tour, right?

i will be...walking around dublin with my friends and my mammy, enjoying the fruits of our collective tour-organising labour and admiring my map in the booklet,
 
horn rim specs give me the horn


but, this probably isn't the right thread for this...



dameedna460.jpg
 
30 years after the introduction of equal pay legislation there still exists a pay difference of 15% - women earn on average 15% less than men
What kind of average? Average pay per hour worked or average annual salary?

Maybe I should go to the source and ask ...

edit: Can't find the statistic on the NWCI website, where'd you come across it? Not trying to set up a confrontation with the thumped chicks, just naturally curious about (and suspicious of) oft-quoted statistics
 
What kind of average? Average pay per hour worked or average annual salary?

Maybe I should go to the source and ask ...

edit: Can't find the statistic on the NWCI website, where'd you come across it? Not trying to set up a confrontation with the thumped chicks, just naturally curious about (and suspicious of) oft-quoted statistics
oft quoth, is the phase. "oft quoth statisthick." that's the phrase. women do 35%* less work cos of the gossip chromosome. so they're actually getting a good deal.


oft-quoth stat.
 
· 30 years after the introduction of equal pay legislation there still exists a pay difference of 15% - women earn on average 15% less than men

Is there any truth to this being the case because of a lot of women taking career breaks to have kids and returning to work on lesser experience and hence lesser pay than male counterparts, thus bringing their "average" down?

I'm not havin a go, just heard this once.
 
Is there any truth to this being the case because of a lot of women taking career breaks to have kids and returning to work on lesser experience and hence lesser pay than male counterparts, thus bringing their "average" down?

I'm not havin a go, just heard this once.

shit buzz loosing out for having kids.
 
What kind of average? Average pay per hour worked or average annual salary?

Maybe I should go to the source and ask ...

edit: Can't find the statistic on the NWCI website, where'd you come across it? Not trying to set up a confrontation with the thumped chicks, just naturally curious about (and suspicious of) oft-quoted statistics

Sorry, not on the website itself but it's in their factsheet on women and abortion/women and human rights on this page

Is there any truth to this being the case because of a lot of women taking career breaks to have kids and returning to work on lesser experience and hence lesser pay than male counterparts, thus bringing their "average" down?

No there's no truth to it. It's just women looking for attention and more money.

Ah, I'm only joshing. I'm in the middle of writing a thesis here so I don't have time to answer your question properly (and it'd be awesome if someone could) but there is an element of truth to what you're saying. The point being that the situation you've just pointed out is symptomatic of grave inequality in a competitive system that is based on the now outdated presumption that workers don't have to take lumps of time off at any point for having babies, because workers were traditionally men. This essentially confines you to a lower rank/position/less eligible for promotion if you want to have kids, and happen to be the one with the gee n bubes who has to do the staying out of work for a time.

The gender pay gap is a lot more complex than this though, and there are many more factors at play.
 
The gender pay gap is a lot more complex than this though, and there are many more factors at play.

I know groups like the CBI (spit) argued that women generally, as a whole, focussed on different education/career paths that happen to be less commercially valued by the current capitalist system. This doesn't reflect my views.

something just popped into my head as I type.... there have been numerous divorce cases recently where "big businessmen" had to pay shed loads of money to their wives. Is this the law courts recognising the value of intangibles as real inputs to value creation (from a capitalist perspective)?

One of the things that makes me slightly uncomfortable with the equal pay debate is that on the surface it doesn't attempt to recognise the value to society of intangibles such as caring, home-building, motherhood etc. which is really more valuable that any narrow interpretation of commercial skills.

i'll probably have to re-read what i just typed as it probably doesn't make sense.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Activity
So far there's no one here
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.

Support thumped.com

Support thumped.com and upgrade your account

Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...

Upgrade now

Latest threads

Latest Activity

Loading…
Back
Top