# On Feminism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 28, 2015, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023 "2015-05-28T10:02:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![chaika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chaika/32/405_2.png) [@chaika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chaika)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/141 "2015-06-01T18:25:08Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > There is no wage gap. It is due to different work choices and salary negotiations expertise. It also would make little sense. Business in general do not want to hire a person with the same qualifications and experience as another person and pay a significant higher salary for it. It’s just not the way it works. In any case, even if 100% true it’s still an insignificant problem compared to the other issues I listed (in my book, being murdered and in general dying earlier trumps not getting the same paycheck). Women face some problems men don’t face, and men face some problems women don’t – but overall the facts do not give evidence to the theory that women should be worse off as a group and require protection or support by society. And especially not in academia where more women than men graduate. There is no wage gap? Er, what? Of course there is. It has been proven over and over again. Take a look at the link I posted above for more details. And the gender pay gap is hardly an insignificant problem, given the fact that most of us have to work for a living. Very few of us, male or female, (less than 1% of the population) will have to worry about being murdered. ---
**Author:** ![Chauve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5daacb/32.png) [@Chauve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chauve)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/142 "2015-06-01T19:39:50Z")
On the wage gap: If you all want to have this debate about the wage gap, then I suggest investigating the following link. Scott Adams, the creator of “Dilbert,” recently (March 2015) compiled all the modern studies and surveys on the subject of the wage gap and then drew his own meta-conclusion on how they all balanced out. Some feminist sites have even noticed the study and given him credit for a balanced judgement. [http://blog.dilbert.com/post/114055529676/my-verdict-on-gender-bias-in-the-workplace](http://blog.dilbert.com/post/114055529676/my-verdict-on-gender-bias-in-the-workplace) If you don’t care for his opinion and/or want to check the data for yourself, just go to the end of the article and see the long list of links to studies–do your own research and draw your own conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![Chauve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5daacb/32.png) [@Chauve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chauve)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/143 "2015-06-01T19:54:54Z")
Follow-up point on hiring bias: Also a lot of older studies on gender bias are being questioned and re-investigated. A CNN article from April 2015: > [@](#): > > The prevailing wisdom is that sexist hiring in academic science roadblocks women’s careers before they even start. The American Association of University Professors and blue-ribbon commissions attest to this. An influential report by the National Academy of Sciences in 2006 concluded that “on the average, people are less likely to hire a woman than a man with identical qualifications,” and noted that scientists and engineers “are not exempt.” > > […] > > But the facts tell a different story. National hiring audits, some dating back to the 1980s, reveal that female scientists have had a significantly higher chance of being interviewed and hired than men. > > When we searched the literature, we could not find one empirical study of sexism in faculty hiring using actual faculty members as evaluators and focusing on fields in which women are most underrepresented. So we did the study ourselves (published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences), testing 873 faculty members at 371 institutions in 50 states. To tease out sex bias, we created fictional candidate profiles identical in every respect except for sex, and asked faculty to rank these candidates for a tenure-track job. > > […] > > What we found shocked us. Women had an overall 2-to-1 advantage in being ranked first for the job in all fields studied. This preference for women was expressed equally by male and female faculty members, with the single exception of male economists, who were gender neutral in their preferences. > > [http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/opinions/williams-ceci-women-in-science/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/opinions/williams-ceci-women-in-science/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/144 "2015-06-01T20:07:05Z")
> [@chaika](#): > > There is no wage gap? Er, what? Of course there is. It has been proven over and over again. Take a look at the link I posted above for more details. > > And the gender pay gap is hardly an insignificant problem, given the fact that most of us have to work for a living. Very few of us, male or female, (less than 1% of the population) will have to worry about being murdered. This is something I’ve wondered about, so I couldn’t help but doing some research. The .77/dollar statistic appears to be bogus. [No, Women Don’t Make Less Money Than Men](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/01/no-women-don-t-make-less-money-than-men.html) From the Daily Beast. The author says that when you take into account things like “occupations, positions, education, job tenure, or hours worked per week” the wage gap disappears. She says that the ten most remunerative degrees are overwhelmingly studied by men: 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 The ten least remunerative degrees are mostly pursued by women: 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 Now you could argue (and I would agree) that social workers and teachers and students of the arts should be paid more. And frankly, I think all the female majors sound more interesting than the “male” ones, but saying women earn less without looking at what fields they’re in seems disingenuous to me. Don’t get me wrong: I think women (and men) should work in whatever jobs they want. But I suspect that men are choosing boring, but high-paying jobs because there’s so much more pressure on them to be high-earners. [5 Feminist Myths That Will Not Die](http://time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/) Time Magazine. This is the 5th of 5 “myths” that she lists, making basically the same points as the author in the Daily Beast. > [@](#): > > MYTH 5: Women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns—for doing the same work. > > FACTS: No matter how many times this wage gap claim is decisively refuted by economists, it always comes back. The bottom line: the 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure or hours worked per week. When such relevant factors are considered, the wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing. [On Equal Pay Day, key facts about the gender pay gap](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/14/on-equal-pay-day-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-gender-pay-gap/) The Pew Research Center takes a different tack. Eileen Patten says, based on their own research, and without taking into account job, or hours worked or other variables, the gap has shrunk to 84% for all women, and 93% for young women. She goes on to say: > [@](#): > > In spite of its narrowing, the gender pay gap persists. Why is this? In our survey, women were more likely to say they had taken career interruptions to care for their family. And research has shown that these types of interruptions can have an impact on long-term earnings. Roughly four-in-ten mothers say they have taken a significant amount of time off from work (39%) or reduced their work hours (42%) to care for a child or other family member. Roughly a quarter (27%) say they have quit work altogether to take care of these familial responsibilities. (Fewer men say the same. For example, just 24% of fathers say they have taken a significant amount of time off to care for a child or other family member.) Other sources say the same thing. For example, from CBS Money Watch: [The Gender Pay Gap is a Complete Myth](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/) > [@](#): > > when you compare apples to apples, it simply isn’t true. Even the White House report: Women in America: Indicators of Social and Economic Well-Being explains why. Simply put, men choose higher-paying jobs. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/145 "2015-06-01T20:42:09Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > And men are less likely to be awarded custody in family court. But lets send destitute women to euthanasia then, since it’s so much worse. Hooray. > > Yes shit. It’s a unique male privilege to get your guts shot out. But lets throw a smile at it. The last two, at least, but I think all of them, are points that have been addressed before where feminists ARE in agreement that the men are being short-changed. Yes, more men are killed in combat, but that’s because women are not allowed to participate in the military (and wars) in the same capacity as men. And the people who dictate that are men, not women. Similar with men being less likely to be awarded custody. Again this has been mentioned before as something that feminists work against. The idea of women being awarded custody more often stems from a sexist/patriarchal thinking that children do better with moms/women are supposed to handle kids/men are not supposed to do much parenting. This is something that feminists combat. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/146 "2015-06-01T21:04:54Z")
> [@KarlGrenze](#): > > The last two, at least, but I think all of them, are points that have been addressed before where feminists ARE in agreement that the men are being short-changed. Yes, more men are killed in combat, but that’s because women are not allowed to participate in the military (and wars) in the same capacity as men. And the people who dictate that are men, not women. > > Similar with men being less likely to be awarded custody. Again this has been mentioned before as something that feminists work against. The idea of women being awarded custody more often stems from a sexist/patriarchal thinking that children do better with moms/women are supposed to handle kids/men are not supposed to do much parenting. This is something that feminists combat. Which ones? Mary Daly specifically opposed drafting women. Now that was back in the early 70’s, when there was a draft. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/147 "2015-06-01T21:10:57Z")
There’s always a point in these conversations, as like a dozen different feminists say things like “feminists _do_ talk about that, and _do_ care about this,” and the people who aren’t feminists say “who? who? I’ve never seen any” that the whole thing starts to look a little bit Lewis Carroll. If feminists fitting these various descriptions don’t exist, who are you arguing with? ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/148 "2015-06-01T21:15:27Z")
I think one of the top feminist political issues in America should be maternity leave, which is laughably bad compared to other industrial countries, especially Europe. Heck, some countries even have paid paternity leave as well. You can do all sorts of crazy things when you don’t pour a trillion dollars into defense. What would be next? Maybe the opposite of the thing where you find clever ways of shutting down almost every abortion clinic in the state. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/149 "2015-06-01T21:20:26Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > I think one of the top feminist political issues in America should be maternity leave, which is laughably bad compared to other industrial countries, especially Europe. Heck, some countries even have paid paternity leave as well. You can do all sorts of crazy things when you don’t pour a trillion dollars into defense. Parental leave is definitely a big deal, and definitely should not be maternal only. Men do not need time to recover from childbirth/surgery, but they need time to bond with their babies, and to adapt to tumultuous new schedules and, in cases where they are in a relationship with the one who did give birth, to support the new mom in her recovery. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/150 "2015-06-01T22:45:13Z")
We finally agree about something. When we had our daughter, she was bottle-fed, and I did the night feedings. When her mom left for a business trip, three weeks later, I stayed home with her. I stayed with her every time she had a business trip, which was 3-5 times a year. The idea that only women can (or should) take care of babies is bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2015, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/151 "2015-06-01T23:20:28Z")
**LinusK** , **Miller** offered links in this thread, post #116, specifically her first and second link, corresponding with your last two assertions. [Here is the second link](http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/bias-against-fathers/) This is the third time the link has been posted. Perhaps you’ll finally read it? Truly, when someone offers you counter cites and you ignore them and go “lalalala can’t read it”, it does not make your position sound and solid. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2015, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/152 "2015-06-02T00:02:53Z")
> [@KarlGrenze](#): > > **LinusK** , **Miller** offered links in this thread, post #116, specifically her first and second link, corresponding with your last two assertions. > > [Here is the second link](http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/bias-against-fathers/) > > This is the third time the link has been posted. Perhaps you’ll finally read it? > > Truly, when someone offers you counter cites and you ignore them and go “lalalala can’t read it”, it does not make your position sound and solid. I’ve already read it, and responded to it. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2015, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/153 "2015-06-02T00:07:30Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I’ve already read it, and responded to it. Well, responded to it, at any rate. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2015, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/154 "2015-06-02T00:10:51Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > Name-dropping is assertion, not evidence. And still isn’t statistically significant. You want us to believe that right-wing talk radio is bad? Define it, define how to test for badness, and show us the test. Define “hate.” Your definition must be absolute; it must include every instance of hatred ever perpetrated, and it must exclude everything that is not hate. Your definition is not allowed either false positives or false negatives. Your definition must be in 12 point Times New Roman, and in modern Czech. You’re just posturing. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2015, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/155 "2015-06-02T01:05:36Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Well, responded to it, at any rate. I’m happy to respond some more. As I pointed out last time, the article is not about improving the situation for fathers; it’s about silence people who argue fathers don’t have a fair shake in divorce court. The first two paragraphs: > [@](#): > > One manner in which Men’s Rights Activists derail feminist arguments is alluding to instances in which women supposedly experience privilege. > > Often, they use the court system – and custody battles in particular – as an example. Notice the words “derail” and “supposedly”. In the first two paragraphs, the author’s already described the purpose of the article: to defend against “Men’s Right’s Activists”. In the fifth paragraph, she sums up the results of her “findings”: “the source of the bias is not in the courts – it’s in the marriage.” She then has an italisized paragraph, in which she states that by talking about “the unique manifestation of patriarchy in straight marriages between a woman and a man” she does not intend to “erase” gays, lesbians, etc. (which, after all, would be a natural inference. How can you talk about the “the unique manifestation of patriarchy in straight marriages between a woman and a man” without “erasing” gay people?) She then admits that > [@](#): > > "Statistically, it appears that the family courts in the United States are biased against fathers. > > For example, 83% of mothers receive custody of their children in divorces. Additionally, men are awarded less support on average than mothers who are awarded support. > > There is also plenty of anecdotal evidence citing situations where mothers were awarded custody in spite of fathers demonstrating interest and potential to provide and care for their children. So she sees there’s a problem. Now what to do about it? The answer is to blame men. On the way to getting there, though, she makes a fundamental mistake about how the law works: > [@](#): > > As I mentioned earlier, the majority of these custody agreements are decided outside of a courtroom. > > That means that the gender roles that are perpetuated in straight marriage are translating into divorce, often without the force of law. I think what she’s trying to imply here is that men are voluntarily giving up their rights. What she doesn’t understand, or what she doesn’t appear to understand, is that settlements are always conditioned by what the parties think they can expect if they go to trial. As a simple example: If you’re arrested in a conservative county, that’s known for handing down harsh sentences, and for convicting innocent men (such as [Michael Morton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Morton_(criminal_justice)), for example) that’s going to influence any plea bargain you decide to take. If you know you’re in a county where the jury pool is filled with conservative Republicans, who need little or no evidence to convict someone, and that the judges pride themselves on handing out maximum sentences, you’re likely to accept a plea bargain you might not accept if the circumstances were different. The point being that there’s no point in going to trial in a custody case (which may cost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars you don’t have) if the judge is going to give custody to the mother anyway. She then gets to the point: it’s men’s fault they’re not getting custody: \*\* > [@](#): > > I **n order for fathers to be considered equally worthy caregivers in the eyes of the court, they must first be equal caregivers within the home.** \*\*(bolding original) She goes on to say, “Fathers must create bonds with their children through caregiving and demonstrate a commitment their children in order to defy the unfair gender stereotypes that define their position in the family.” Which seems strange to me. Typically feminists blame the stereotyper, not the stereotyped. Instead, she’s leaving it up to fathers to change the stereotype. That is a dramatic departure from how feminists typical deal with stereotypes. Imagine a feminist saying, “Women must become better workers, pay more attention to their jobs, and work harder, **first** , before they can be seen as equal in the workplace.” Basically, if this is supposed to be an example of a feminist working to get fairer outcomes in custody disputes, it fails. ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2015, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/156 "2015-06-02T11:15:47Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Define “hate.” Your definition must be absolute; it must include every instance of hatred ever perpetrated, and it must exclude everything that is not hate. Your definition is not allowed either false positives or false negatives. Your definition must be in 12 point Times New Roman, and in modern Czech. > > You’re just posturing. Why should I? I’m not the one saying “This group is definitely hateful and this group definitely isn’t.” ---
**Author:** ![Taber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ac91a4/32.png) [@Taber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Taber)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2015, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/157 "2015-06-03T00:12:47Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Which ones? > > Mary Daly specifically opposed drafting women. > > Now that was back in the early 70’s, when there was a draft. I think NOW is a slightly larger voice in feminism 1980 NOW announces opposition to the draft, but states that if there is a draft, NOW supports the inclusion of women on the same basis as men. > **[Highlights | National Organization for Women](https://now.org/about/history/highlights/)** > > Check out NOW's major accomplishments throughout our history. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2015, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/158 "2015-06-03T02:50:46Z")
Thanks, **Linus** , but I had, also, read the article. You don’t like her conclusions, which is not surprising. But you said “Feminists don’t talk about this.” And you were wrong. They do. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2015, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/159 "2015-06-03T03:08:01Z")
[This article is undeniably by a feminist](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-doucet/feminism-fathering_b_840421.html) and discusses historical and social dynamics that result in unequal custody decisions. And if you’re really interested in a feminist take on family structures, I recommend [Stephanie Coontz](http://www.stephaniecoontz.com/), a brilliant historian of the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2015, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023/160 "2015-06-03T03:09:37Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Which seems strange to me. Typically feminists blame the stereotyper, not the stereotyped. Instead, she’s leaving it up to fathers to change the stereotype. That is a dramatic departure from how feminists typical deal with stereotypes. Imagine a feminist saying, “Women must become better workers, pay more attention to their jobs, and work harder, **first** , before they can be seen as equal in the workplace.” > > Basically, if this is supposed to be an example of a feminist working to get fairer outcomes in custody disputes, it fails. Couldn’t have said it better. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/721023.md?page=9)