Is Feminism Today Equivalent To The KKK of The Past???

Since you didn't bother reading two of the three articles I'll highlight some of their points...

One of the best studies on the wage gap was released in 2009 by the U.S. Department of Labor. It examined more than 50 peer-reviewed papers and concluded that the 23-cent wage gap "may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers."

Research indicates that women may value non-wage benefits more than men do, and as a result prefer to take a greater portion of their compensation in the form of health insurance and other fringe benefits

The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers.
First, the actual fact. Yes, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the 2012 ratio of median earnings between full-time working women and men was roughly 77 percent. But what does this actually tell us? A lot less than you’d expect. This compares the salaries that all women receive to the salaries that all men receive, with no consideration at all of an individual’s education, work experience, occupation, hours worked or basically anything else. That makes a big difference.

women are more likely to work fewer hours (or work part-time). Restricting a comparison of men and women to those working forty hours a week is enough to reduce the gap to 87 cents (incidentally, women working part-time made 110 percent of what men did).
women tend to enter into lower-paying occupations, as I mentioned. High-paying industries like finance and engineering tend to be male-dominated,

 

Wage gap is largely the result of what men and women choose to study at university:

If today’s young women want to close the wage gap, they should change their college majors. Aspiring early childhood educators or social workers should reconsider: the median earnings in these fields are $36,000 and $39,000, respectively. By contrast, petroleum engineering and metallurgy degrees promise far more money: median earnings are $120,000 and $80,000. Here is a list of the ten most remunerative majors compiled by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Note that men overwhelmingly outnumber women in all but one major.
1.Petroleum Engineering: 87% Male
2.Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Sciences and Administration: 48% Male
3.Mathematics and Computer Science: 67% Male
4.Aerospace Engineering: 88% Male
5.Chemical Engineering: 72% Male
6.Electrical Engineering: 89% Male
7.Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering: 97% Male
8.Mechanical Engineering: 90% Male
9.Metallurgical Engineering: 83% Male
10.Mining and Mineral Engineering: 90% Male

And here are the 10 least remunerative majors. This time it is women who prevail in nine out of ten majors.
1.Counseling Psychology: 74% Female
2.Early Childhood Education: 97% Female
3.Theology and Religious Vocations: 34% Female
4.Human Services and Community Organization: 81% Female
5.Social Work: 88% Female
6.Drama and Theater Arts: 60% Female
7.Studio Arts: 66% Female
8.Communication Disorders Sciences and Services: 94% Female
9.Visual and Performing Arts: 77% Female
10.Health and Medical Preparatory Programs: 55% Female

There are far more women than men in college, and they earned more than 58% of college degrees this year. If large numbers of female students changed from the second group to the first, that would do far more to narrow the gap than, say, the Paycheck Fairness Act. That Act (still floundering in Congress) primarily targets the allegedly sexist practices of employers. But, as most economists will tell you, employers cannot be blamed for much or any of the gap. It is women’s choices that are the problem — beginning with their college majors.

 

regression analysis is an odd statistical tool to choose to study earnings after 1 year bcs regression analysis compares two variables in relation to one another like say earnings in relationship to time??? Are you sure that's not the jist of this study and not earnings after 1 year???? I guess I'll read it

Since you've discovered the wage gap is only 6.6% and not 23% I'm sure you're going to correct your feminist comrades when they claim women earn 77 cents to a mans dollar-right????

 

That study was created by feminists, and feminists have a pretty good track record of distorting the truth, like counting women as victims of rape who in follow up studies say themselves they were not raped ec cetera

 

Like I said two of the links you provided did not work.

The operative words "may be almost entirely". May = speculation. Do you have a link to the source study or the title of the study so I can review the source? Have you read the source study?

Again with the "may".

And yet again "may".

And this has what to do with equality?

Like I said, I need the name of the study or a link to the source study as I need context.

 

Its your source. If you don't agree with it then why did you link a blog that used that source?

Incorrect. The wage gap is 6.6% one year after college (2007–2008 ). The source study is limited in scope and does not represent all women in the work force.

 

I think I'm going to go with Betteridge's law of headlines for this one.

 

Again, it was the source used in the blog so if you disagree with it then why use the blog as a source?

Source citation needed.

 

IMO its not about making top dollar, its about equal pay for equal effort. A male and female janitor who work at the same place, have the same experience, work the same hours, have the same seniority, should be paid the same. The same should hold true for scientists who work at the same place, have the same experience, the same level of education, work the same hours, have the same seniority.

I do not have much concern for the wage gap when measured against all employed men and women... I just want equal wages for equal effort.

 

http://www.d.umn.edu/cla/faculty/jhamlin/3925/Readings/RapeCultureSummers.pdf

Koss and her colleagues concluded that
15.4 percent of respondents had been raped,
and that 12.1 percent had been victims of
attempted rape.9 Thus, a total of 27.5 percent
of the respondents were determined to have
been victims of rape or attempted rape because
they gave answers that fit Koss’s criteria for
rape (penetration by penis, finger, or other
object under coercive influence such as physical
force, alcohol, or threats). However, that is
not how the so-called rape victims saw it. Only
about a quarter of the women Koss calls rape
victims labeled what happened to them as
rape.

 

Yes, language such as, "may," is standard in scientific studies. In Newton's study on gravity I have no doubt it says something like, my findings suggest that gravity may exist..

But I'm sure the 23% wage gap is fact right???

 

Unfortunately almost all of the research that exists on gender issues is feminist research. Similarly in Nazi germany most of the research that existed on race was Nazi research, and yes, obviously, gleaning the truth from such biased sources can be difficult or even dangerous...

Scientists have been fired from their jobs because they've questioned the female supremacy dogma of feminists...

 

Wow.. are you afraid of being lynched by feminists?

 

And this supports the following quote how?

My problem with your claim is that you make sweeping generalizations of feminism as if a vocal few represent the whole. On the first page of your source the author limits her comments to "Some feminists routinely refer to American society as a “rape culture.” which is a fair statement that avoids an unobjective generalization of feminism as a whole.

For the record any feminist who knowingly misrepresents the facts is wrong and does more harm to the cause than anything else. I also argue that a single dishonest person or group does not represent the whole.

 

May still implies uncertainty which makes for a unreliable foundation for a claim. In the context of the source you quoted may = hypothesis which may or may not represent a fact.

Heck if I know as I never claimed that the wage gap is 23%... I only argue that there is a wage gap.

 

And your point is? Do you have evidence to back up your claim? Even if "almost all of the research that exists on gender issues is feminist research" what is wrong with that?

Strawman. Makes for some dramatic hyperbole but lacks any objectivity.

Source citation needed.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers

In January 2005, at a Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce sponsored by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Summers sparked controversy with his discussion of why women may have been underrepresented "in tenured positions in science and engineering at top universities and research institutions".
Summers had prefaced his talk, saying he was adopting an "entirely positive, rather than normative approach" and that his remarks were intended to be an "attempt at provocation."[29]
Summers then began by identifying three hypotheses for the higher proportion of men in high-end science and engineering positions:
1. The high-powered job hypothesis
2. Different availability of aptitude at the high end
3. Different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search[29]
The second hypothesis, the generally greater variability among men (compared to women) in tests of cognitive abilities,[30][31][32] leading to proportionally more males than females at both the lower and upper tails of the test score distributions, caused the most controversy. In his discussion of this hypothesis, Summers said that "even small differences in the standard deviation [between genders] will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out [from the mean]".[29] Summers referenced research that implied differences between the standard deviations of males and females in the top 5% of twelfth graders under various tests. He then went on to argue that, if this research were to be accepted, then "whatever the set of attributes... that are precisely defined to correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or being a chemist at Berkeley... are probably different in their standard deviations as well".[29]
Summers then concluded his discussion of the three hypotheses by saying:
So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are, and working very hard to address them.[29]
Summers then went on to discuss approaches to remedying the shortage of women in high-end science and engineering positions.
This lunch-time talk drew accusations of sexism and careless scholarship, and an intense negative response followed, both nationally and at Harvard.[33] Summers apologized repeatedly.[34] Nevertheless, the controversy is speculated to have contributed to his resigning his position as president of Harvard University the following year, as well as costing Summers the job of Treasury Secretary in Obama's administration.[35]
Summers's protégée Sheryl Sandberg, has defended him saying that "Larry has been a true advocate for women throughout his career" at the World Bank and Treasury. Sandberg described of the lunch talk "What few seem to note is that it is remarkable that he was giving the speech in the first place - that he cared enough about women's careers and their trajectory in the fields of math and science to proactively analyze the issues and talk about what was going wrong".[

 

Really, lol

So you believe counting someone as a rape victim in a study who in a follow up study say themselves they were not raped is not distorting the truth???

You must have a very fluid definition of the truth, which seems to be a trait shared by many feminists-lol...

 

I can see how you would disagree with something I believe without even reading it since i am an egalitarean and therefore believe in equality and you are a feminist-lol

 

I really do believe there are people here who actually cannot read English, as the highlighted part in your own comment does not support your assertion of

You have provided comment that is supposed to support your absolute assertion when in fact it does not.

Do you even know what speculated means?

 

Speculated implies uncertainty which makes for a unreliable foundation for a claim. In the context of the source you quoted, speculated = conjecture which may or may not represent a fact.

 

You have no grasp of my actual objection of your statments. So let me repost it: My problem with your claim is that you make sweeping generalizations of feminism as if a vocal few represent the whole. On the first page of your source the author limits her comments to "Some feminists routinely refer to American society as a “rape culture.” which is a fair statement that avoids an unobjective generalization of feminism as a whole.

For the record any feminist who knowingly misrepresents the facts is wrong and does more harm to the cause than anything else. I also argue that a single dishonest person or group does not represent the whole.

 

Your red herring shows me that you cannot defend your position.

 

The virulent man hating feminists are NOT just a few women, they are the majority and they have the media on their side.

You have come to the wrong conclusions here.

 

Nice opinion... if you want to elevate that to a fact I will need source citation.