Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

nibletz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 140 posts

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#121

Post by csixty4 »

alan_cx wrote: post #49

Why does no one care how many men are in hairdressing, finger nail painting, child care, teaching and so on?

There was a big push to get more men in nursing a decade ago. Hospitals offered big hiring bonuses and 100% tuition reimbursement after a couple years' employment. There were billboards on the side of the expressway talking about how it wasn't just a woman's job.

I don't know how successful it was, but I would have jumped on it if I wasn't close to finishing a CS degree already.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#122

Post by growupkids »

growupkids wrote: post #93
pessimizer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Men run everything. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. 3. Women are under attack by men. I don't think these points are controversial. 1. Women are 50% of the workforce, but 4.5% of fortune 1000 CEO positions. 2. Women didn't get the right to vote in America until 50 years after black people, who were officially only partially human. 3. Is a characterization.

1. Men run everything. Gross generalization. Clearly not true. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. Another gross generalization, and your support for this is that a long time ago women couldn't vote, therefore often men don't think of women as human? By that twisted logic the statement Germany wants to invade France would still be true. 3. Women are under attack by men. Laughably histrionic. Is that like the…

Sorry, it won't let me reply any deeper. I'm glad you agree you are generalizing, even though you don't seem to want to acknowledge you're making gross generalizations. Either way, you do realize generalizing does not make your point valid. If anything, it's generally considered a fallacy and for good reason. And since you haven't refuted any of the facts I've posted, I'm glad that I've been able to help you learn the world isn't nearly as bad as you seem to have been lead to believe. Contrary to what you seem to think, men do not often think of women as less than human, men do not run everything (that's that generalization again), women do make the same money as men, more women get degrees than men, women live longer than men, and your generalization that men, not some men, but men are attacking women is also not true. Clearly all men are not attacking women. There is no war on women.

And do I think women are under attack by women? That's an interesting question, women do seem to be fairly angry and judgmental towards each other, anecdotally speaking. I dunno, that's a good question. Are women attacking women?

And clearly I think your uterus is unmoored. You nailed it in one. Bravo.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#123

Post by athesyn »

pessimizer wrote: post #38
athesyn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he doesn't live in a modern liberal society. I doubt it though.

Any particular point to object to, or just a general speculation about who I am?

I don't care about arguments with feminists. I'm not a white male or a white woman so those terminologies don't apply to me. It takes time for sexism, racism to work its way out of the system but most of what you said are ridiculous visceral lies.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#124

Post by pessimizer »

trentmb wrote: post #90
pessimizer wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do men dominate homelessness, or do old women and single mothers with children? I'd be interested in any links you have. also: >Women are successful in the West In what way? >more of them get college degrees, Oh, that actually is pretty good. >they live longer, Didn't they always? That's just biology, isn't it? >no law forces them to register for the military (in the U.S. at least), That's not a success of women, tha…

Regarding homelessness: http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/who.html GENDER Most studies show that single homeless adults are more likely to be male than female. In 2007, a survey by the U.S. Conference of Mayors found that of the population surveyed 35% of the homeless people who are members of households with children are male while 65% of these people are females. However, 67.5% of the single homeless popul…

Quickly:

Single Homeless Adults: 76% Individuals in Homeless Families: 24%

male percentage of single homeless adults: 67.5% female percentage of single homeless adults: 32.5%

male percentage of homeless family members: 35% female percentage of homeless family members: 65%

single male percentage, all homeless: .675 * 76% = 51.3% single female percentage, all homeless: .325 * 76% = 24.7%

family male percentage, all homeless: .35 * 24% = 8.4% family female percentage, all homeless: .65 * 24% = 15.6%

male percentage = 51.3% + 8.4% = 60% female percentage = 24.7% + 15.6% = 40%

Ok, interesting...

----

AGE

In 2003, children under the age of 18 accounted for 39% of the homeless population; 42% of these children were under the age of five (National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2004). This same study found that unaccompanied minors comprised 5% of the urban homeless population. However, in other cities and especially in rural areas, the numbers of children experiencing homelessness are much higher.

----

minors, 42% of all homeless children under 5, .39 * 42% = 16.38%

So male, 60%; female, 40%; children under 5, 16%.

If I make the assumption that the children under 5 percentage is evenly split between male and female, and an additional assumption that homeless children are members of families, it means that of the 8.4% of males homeless in families, all but a remnant are under the care of a homeless woman.

That means that the portion of the homeless that are women and their children is around half.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#125

Post by pessimizer »

growupkids wrote: post #110
pessimizer wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Women earn the majority of bachelors, masters and doctorates Wonderful. Its good that the efforts that were made to help women in education have borne so much fruit that we're starting (or were starting in the 90s) to worry about boys falling behind. That's a sign that the supports might eventually be alright to take away. >Women live longer than men: Since the stone age. Is this a discussion of jealousy, or sexism?…

Here's another source, it appears there is no gender gap in pay: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-bigg... It also appears the later differences in pay may have more to do with life choices. Such as raising a family, which believe it or not some women consider a higher priority than their careers. Blasphemy, I know, clearly a byproduct of the patriarchy.

"Comparing men and women job-by-job conceals the fact that men still dominate many of the highest-paying jobs. PayScale studied more than 120 occupation categories, from "machinist" to "dietician." Nine of the ten lowest-paying jobs (e.g.: child-care worker, library assistant) were disproportionately female. Nine of the ten highest-paying jobs (e.g.: software architect, psychiatrist) were majority male. Nurse anesthetist was the best-paid position held mostly by women; but an estimated 69 percent of better-paid anesthesiologists were male."

Blasphemy, I know, but it was your link.

edit: This is exactly the case I made, and it is the conclusion to the reference. I don't know what kind of dissonance it takes to downvote me for pointing it out.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#126

Post by pessimizer »

growupkids wrote: post #122
growupkids wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Men run everything. Gross generalization. Clearly not true. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. Another gross generalization, and your support for this is that a long time ago women couldn't vote, therefore often men don't think of women as human? By that twisted logic the statement Germany wants to invade France would still be true. 3. Women are under attack by men. Laughably histrionic. Is that like the…

Sorry, it won't let me reply any deeper. I'm glad you agree you are generalizing, even though you don't seem to want to acknowledge you're making gross generalizations. Either way, you do realize generalizing does not make your point valid. If anything, it's generally considered a fallacy and for good reason. And since you haven't refuted any of the facts I've posted, I'm glad that I've been able to help you learn th…

Fine, then I won't even accept that it is a generalization. Men actually run everything, and when there's a woman running something, there's ultimately a man running that woman.

>And since you haven't refuted any of the facts I've posted

None of the facts that you posted speak to your point that "the world isn't nearly as bad as you seem to have been lead to believe." You haven't shown me anything that I didn't know, but I enjoy the condescension.

>men do not often think of women as less than human,

saying it again doesn't make it true.

>women do make the same money as men,

No, they don't. Read your own references. Women make the same money in the same jobs as men, early in their careers.

>more women get degrees than men,

True.

>women live longer than men,

Again, what does that have to do with sexism?

>and your generalization that men are attacking women is also not true.

Bullshit.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#127

Post by pessimizer »

mekoka wrote: post #111
pessimizer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Men run everything. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. 3. Women are under attack by men. I don't think these points are controversial. 1. Women are 50% of the workforce, but 4.5% of fortune 1000 CEO positions. 2. Women didn't get the right to vote in America until 50 years after black people, who were officially only partially human. 3. Is a characterization.

I saw your earlier interventions. Some of your arguments may be sound, but this one actually makes it harder to take you seriously and does a disservice to your cause. You might do better by arguing from a position that is grounded closer to reality (as in 2014 reality).

What argument? I'm not trying to make an argument - somebody called out three different things that I said, and I attempted to defend them.

I have absolutely no cause other than a factual basis for policy and actions.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#128

Post by pessimizer »

ps4fanboy wrote: post #113
pessimizer wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that the age of the company isn't what's important, but the age of the CEO. If a 150 year-old company has a 45 year old CEO, what does the age of the company have to do with it - unless you are arguing for long lasting traditions of discrimination that are invariant for a company.

Large companies tend to have a fair amount of nepotism in the top ranking positions. You would have to control for this as well.

Women would benefit from nepotism.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#129

Post by pessimizer »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #52
pessimizer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Men run everything. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. 3. Women are under attack by men. I don't think these points are controversial. 1. Women are 50% of the workforce, but 4.5% of fortune 1000 CEO positions. 2. Women didn't get the right to vote in America until 50 years after black people, who were officially only partially human. 3. Is a characterization.

You're relying on absolutes and binaries, which has always been a very flawed method of determining any situation, as it ignores all forms of context, nuances and culture. The world isn't as simple as "Men prosper, women suffer." Not at all. 1. A group of men run most things. 2. A group of men often don't think of women as completely human. 3. I don't even know how to fix this.

>1. A group of men run most things.

I don't believe this. I don't know that there's a group of men that run things. What I'm saying is that as you move higher in the chain of management, you stop seeing women.

>2. A group of men often don't think of women as completely human.

I am not saying this. I am saying that often men don't think of women as fully human like themselves. I am not saying that there is a group of sexists that is causing all of the problems. I believe there are people who are very and openly sexist, and people that are less sexist and less open about it, and the bulk of us that just sometimes suffer from lazy thinking or ideological blinders.

>3. I don't even know how to fix this.

Support programs that help and encourage women.

Re: Do Women Only Initiatives Really Help Women?

#130

Post by gdwatson »

pessimizer wrote: post #20

There's no connection between the headline and the article, which not only doesn't examine the results of any women-only initiatives, but only mentions a single example (that it seems to approve of.) >But there’s something wrong when we treat half the population like a minority or special interest group. There's also something wrong when we treat half the population like baby breeding kitchen help, too. We remediate…

"There's also something wrong when we treat half the population like baby breeding kitchen help, too."

Is that really your view of stay-at-home mothers?

Post reply on HN