The destructiveness of sexism

[Nithavela]

If I'm her boss, I don't.

Of course you dont. You only value your own gain, not the gain of the human species as a whole, like any good ape.

And I dont mean ape in an insulting fashion, but to highlight that this is just evolution at work. You just do your best to propagate your genes and who cares about the competition.

 

[zephcom]

If I'm her boss, I don't. I promote based on merit. And by merit, I mean contributing to my team. And if the men come out on top, I'm not going to "recalibrate" the results, like the female CEO at Yahoo did. And got sued for.

I hate it too when doing the right things gets in the way of accumulating wealth.

Where -do- people get the stupid idea that accumulating wealth should have anything at all to do with people, their lives, or their welfare.

<just in case it isn't apparent, that was tongue-in-cheek>

 

[Daniel C]

She is worth more because she is contributing to the continuation of the human race.

You know, if you value such a thing.

That's absolutely fine and I appreciate that view. The problem is many don't just want to create life they want to create life and carry on working and doing a lousy job at raising the new life because too interested in work. They want government to pass laws to force semi-dedicated mothers back into the workplace and everybody suffers.

 

[usexpat97]

Sorry you don't approve, but the best people are rated based on their contribution to the company. Some "contribution to the human species" is of no consequence to my business. That is the right thing to do, and that is how it will remain.

 

[Nithavela]

That's absolutely fine and I appreciate that view. The problem is many don't just want to create life they want to create life and carry on working and doing a lousy job at raising the new life because too interested in work. They want government to pass laws to force semi-dedicated mothers back into the workplace and everybody suffers.

There are countries where mothers (and fathers!) get paid time off by law after the birth of a child to raise their young children. After that time is up, they ideally can return to their workplace and, after a period of reacclimatisation, continue with their career where they left off.

 

[Nithavela]

Sorry you don't approve, but the best people are rated based on their contribution to the company. Some "contribution to the human species" is of no consequence to my business. That is the right thing to do, and that is how it will remain.

Id prefer if the human species died out as quick as possible, so you have my stamp of approval.

 

[zephcom]

Sorry you don't approve, but the best people are rated based on their contribution to the company. Some "contribution to the human species" is of no consequence to my business. That is the right thing to do, and that is how it will remain.

When anyone or any organization begins to feel that 'contribution to the human species' is no longer a consequence to them or the organization, the world itself becomes endangered.

It is precisely that attitude which is causing the expected collapse of the human species in the next couple of centuries due to human caused climate change. The pursuit of wealth is simply not worth the damage it causes because of the very thing you claim is the 'right thing to do'.

If the pursuit of wealth is not benefiting society, society has not only a right, but obligation to stop the entire process.

 

[Daniel C]

There are countries where mothers (and fathers!) get paid time off by law after the birth of a child to raise their young children. After that time is up, they ideally can return to their workplace and, after a period of reacclimatisation, continue with their career where they left off.

I live in one of those countries.


The employer is forced to hold the position open for the women's return,she gets paid maternity leave and decides when she will leave for the pregnancy.

Surely this isn't how effective business or even family life is supposed to run?

 

[Nithavela]

I live in one of those countries.


The employer is forced to hold the position open for the women's return,she gets paid maternity leave and decides when she will leave for the pregnancy.

Surely this isn't how effective business or even family life is supposed to run?

It seems to work out, though.

 

[zephcom]

I live in one of those countries.


The employer is forced to hold the position open for the women's return,she gets paid maternity leave and decides when she will leave for the pregnancy.

Surely this isn't how effective business or even family life is supposed to run?

Surely it is.

 

[comana]

That's absolutely fine and I appreciate that view. The problem is many don't just want to create life they want to create life and carry on working and doing a lousy job at raising the new life because too interested in work. They want government to pass laws to force semi-dedicated mothers back into the workplace and everybody suffers.

Few mothers can afford not to go back to work. I work for a company that provides flexibility to mothers of infants/young children so they can balance home and work so they are not forced to take a part-time or lower paying job. Incidentally the company is owned by a woman which is probably why there is a policy of understanding the needs of a parenting workforce.

 

[Daniel C]

It seems to work out, though.

Yeah, with the all time high divorce rates, and the broken homes and the sexual assault accusations in the work place and the bankrupt western nations.Keep dreamin.

 

[Nithavela]

Yeah, with the all time high divorce rates, and the broken homes and the sexual assault accusations in the work place and the bankrupt western nations.Keep dreamin.

What does any of that have to do with paid maternety leave?

 

[Daniel C]

Few mothers can afford not to go back to work. I work for a company that provides flexibility to mothers of infants/young children so they can balance home and work so they are not forced to take a part-time or lower paying job. Incidentally the company is owned by a woman which is probably why there is a policy of understanding the needs of a parenting workforce.

Women in the workplace has saturated most industries driving down the average household income. An excess of labour decreases wages,a shortage of labour increases wages.

So if we kept the traditional role of men working and women playing supporting roles this wouldn't have happened.

 

[Nithavela]

Women in the workplace has saturated most industries driving down the average household income. An excess of labour decreases wages,a shortage of labour increases wages.

So if we kept the traditional role of men working and women playing supporting roles this wouldn't have happened.

Do you really think the women in the workplace have driven down wages?

 

[comana]

Women in the workplace has saturated most industries driving down the average household income. An excess of labour decreases wages,a shortage of labour increases wages.

So if we kept the traditional role of men working and women playing supporting roles this wouldn't have happened.

Women who do have children will only be raising them for a portion of their lives. What of the rest? Women also have intelligence and desires beyond the walls of her home or child rearing. Women have just as much to offer outside of the home as men and things are not going back to “the good old days” of women living in a man’s shadow.

 

[Daniel C]

Do you really think the women in the workplace have driven down wages?

Before they entered the workplace on mass in the 1960's, yes. People back then could have large family's and only the father needed to work.

 

[zephcom]

Women in the workplace has saturated most industries driving down the average household income. An excess of labour decreases wages,a shortage of labour increases wages.

So if we kept the traditional role of men working and women playing supporting roles this wouldn't have happened.

Now see, we learn things all the time. -I- thought the advancements of robotics and computerization which eliminate jobs drove down wages. And the idea that we have more people today to fill fewer jobs is probably bogus too, huh?

Who knew that all these low wages was totally and completely the fault of those uppity women who turned to the work place as a way to control their own future instead of just being satisfied with being a breeder for man was the cause of all the problems we have now with wages.

 

[zephcom]

Before they entered the workplace on mass in the 1960's, yes. People back then could have large family's and only the father needed to work.

Ah!!! The longing to live in the past instead of having to deal with the present. Of course, in the Fifties and Sixties we had FAR fewer people needing to do jobs. Remember? Society killed off over 60,000,000 people in the Forties.

I suppose we COULD recreate those wonderful years again if we just killed off a huge portion of the population. There would be a LOT of high paying jobs and we would need huge families to repopulate the world.

I just don't understand why people continue to think that if we could 'just go back to the good ole days' life would be great. We are stuck in the present.

 

[zephcom]

---Staff Edit---

This particular section of the forum is not designed to be exclusively 'Christian'. It is designed to discuss ethics and morality in general.

Treating women in an ethical and moral manner is completely germane to the theme of the forum. Women are either human or they are not. If they are human, they deserve the same treatment the rest of humanity expects.