Sunday, November 1, 2009

feminist rant ~ Women have never striven more for less

I made quite a few comments on this article and one follows:

10/31/2009 7:34:12 PM
More victimization drivel from a feminist and as usual she has her facts wrong. In the USA the degree gap is 148 female on average overall degrees for every one hundred male (see Prof. Mark Perry's blog). In the Masters category it is over 160 degree's for females for every one hundred male.

The wage gap myth still perpetuates and she’s wrong here as well and provides no citations for her assertions. A recent Canadian Doctors report showed female Doctors make less than male Doctors. Was it the big bad Patriarchy or the evil government? No - it was simple - as it is in almost all cases. Female doctors work fewer hours and spend more time with the family.

The Federal and Ontario Public Service are both 55% female dominated as opposed to 45% male and this includes many senior positions. The age cohort of 20-30 for Ontario teachers is overwhelmingly female. 32,421 to 8,012 which is 404.66% greater. Our poor sons will be further feminized and further accused of hyperactivity as she as suggested above.

In this age of Victim oriented Feminisim where they believe they are controlled by this nebulous patriarchy they will never be satisfied with their lot. That is why all studies show they are less happy now than they were in the 70's.

They still believe they work more hours but a recent broad based International study shows that there is only a 20 minute difference on average across all of the USA and it showed in some European countries men work more hours. See an article on it here at Slate. I love the last paragraph and I quote.

"But if women with careers work more than men, while women overall work the same amount as men, then women without market jobs must work less than men. Men can use that argument to hit the couch in the afternoon. Or to end up there at night."

October 30, 2009
By Leah McLaren
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Females are willing to do more work than men for less credit, a reality that will always keep our daughters down no matter how diligent they are in school and work. And it isn't a new story

Good news, girlfriends: It was a banner week for women.

According to the University of Alberta, the salaries of recent female business graduates narrowly exceeded those of their male counterparts for the first time. In the U.S., a recent study called the Shriver Report found that half the American work force is now composed of women.

Women, the report said, currently make up an amazing 40 per cent of the country's breadwinners. On this side of the border, Statistics Canada also reports a dramatic increase in primary female income earners over the past four decades.

So, my sisters, it's time to pop the champagne, put on the Beyoncé and do the Single Ladies dance until ... hey ... wait a second. If you stop the pelvic-thrusting long enough to read the fine print of the 400-odd-page Shriver Report, which was conducted by California first lady Maria Shriver with the help of a think tank, the Center for American Progress, the news is actually not so great.

Despite working harder and in greater numbers than ever before, women are still earning less than men in the same jobs over all and taking most of the responsibility for housework and child care.

In essence, the plight of women is like that old morale-boosting management trick: the no-compensation promotion (also known as the non-raise raise). It's all very flattering until you realize that you have just taken on twice as much work and responsibility for no extra pay or respect.

It's a raw deal. And here's another bitter pill: Working harder than men is not going to help us renegotiate the terms.

If you want proof, just look at the plight of women in the developing world. Of the roughly one billion people who live in extreme poverty, 70 per cent are women and girls. It's a situation that has prompted Plan International to launch its new Because I am a Girl campaign [], a global initiative to change to the lives of women through education and community development work. According to the mission statement, "investing in girls is the key to wiping out the cycle of global poverty." This is because women are the donkeys of the developing world. You don't need a statistician to tell you that African women on balance work much harder than their male counterparts and have far less to show for it.

Of course, there are fewer opportunities in the developing world - it's estimated that 20 million poor women never go to school or learn to read. But when we do get a chance at education, we work our tails off. For every 100 women enrolled in a U.S. university, there are only 77 men. In Canada, a similar gender gap exists.

The question is: Where is all this hard work actually getting us? As one perennially exhausted breadwinner/mother of three young children recently said to me, "As the mother, you just have to work harder at everything. You might as well accept it; otherwise you'll just be miserable."

No wonder the Shriver Report found that women "feel increasingly isolated, stressed and misunderstood." We have cast off our patriarchal shackles, but in exchange for enforced hard labour.

In this new world order, women get to support their partners, remain the primary child-care givers and earn less money for doing the same jobs as men. See? Promotion without compensation.

At least in the 1950s, middle-class women got to stay home and drink martinis like on Mad Men. Maybe they were miserable, but they could wallow in it. Most working mothers I know wouldn't even have the time to register if they were on the verge of a nervous breakdown.

While women around the globe are working more in exchange for less, what are we worried about here in Canada? Boys. Apparently, they're struggling so badly that we need to dismantle the public education system to accommodate them. In Ontario, experts are recommending extra recesses and special "active learning" classrooms where boys can swing from the rafters while learning long division. We're concerned not enough of them are going to university and that, by extension, girls are going to take over the world.

But don't fret, all you protective parents of hyperactive boys, that will never happen. Because what the Shriver Report really tells us is that women are willing to do more work than men for less credit, a reality that will always keep our daughters down no matter how diligent they are in school and work. And it isn't a new story - just ask any African woman.

I'm not saying that men don't work hard - just that, when they do, they are much better at reaping the benefits of success. While men work toward outward status - the double brass ring of power and success - women tend to be driven by intrinsic reasons: duty, loyalty, the need to be "good."

Joanne Lipman, the former deputy managing editor of The Wall Street Journal and editor-in-chief of Portfolio magazine, recently wrote an op-ed piece for The New York Times responding to the Shriver Report. In it, she revealed that, during her years as an editor, "many, many men have come through my door asking for a raise or demanding a promotion. Guess how many women have ever asked me for a promotion? I'll tell you. Exactly... zero."

Maybe while we're letting the boys out at recess, we should take the girls aside and teach them how to demand a raise. If our daughters are going to get a promotion, they might as well get compensated for it.

CTVglobemedia Publishing, Inc

10/31/2009 10:26:41 AM
"Despite working harder and in greater numbers than ever before, women are still earning less than men in the same jobs over all and taking most of the responsibility for housework and child care."

Leah Mclaren, WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE? You provide a link to Statistics Canada for employment figures but no evidence of women earning less than men in the same jobs.


The “pay gap” is probably the most widely-cited example of supposed disadvantages faced by women today. It is also totally misleading, as it is only a snapshot of average yearly full-time incomes that does not account for overtime (about 90% male), type of work, or other non-discriminatory, voluntary factors. The Department of Labor recently funded a study that proved this and found the pay gap is caused by choices, not discrimination.

See also, Prof. June O’Neill, Ph.D. (former director of Congressional Budget Office), “The Gender Gap in Wages, circa 2000,” American Economic Review, 5/03.)

This was further supported in the book “Why Men Earn More" by Warren Farrell, Ph.D., which examined 25 career/life choices men and women make (hours, commute times, etc.) that lead to men earning more and women having more balanced lives, and that showed how men in surveys prioritize money while women prioritize flexibility, shorter hours, shorter commutes, less physical risk and other factors conducive to their choice to be primary parents, an option men still largely don’t have. That is why never-married childless women outearn their male counterparts, and female corporate directors now outearn their male counterparts.

Farrell also lists dozens of careers, including fields of science, where women outearn men.

10/31/2009 10:27:45 AM

Women simply have more options than men to be primary parents, and many of them exercise that option rather than work long, stressful hours. That is why 57% of female graduates of Stanford and Harvard left the workforce within 15 years of entry into the workforce.

This is an option few men have (try being a single male and telling women on the first date that you want to stay home).

Blaming men for women's choices is unfair. In fact research shows most men have no problem with their wives outearning them.

Research also shows most working dads would quit or take a pay cut to spend more time with kids if their spouses could support the family.

Research also shows that parents share workloads more when mothers allow men to be primary parents.

For more, see:

ABC News: “Is the Wage Gap Women’s Choice? Research Suggests Career Decisions, Not Sex Bias, Are at Root of Pay Disparity”

10/31/2009 10:29:56 AM

The media has repeatedly publicized studies that purportedly found men do not do their share of housework. These studies, including one by the United Nations, were seriously flawed as they did not account for work outside the home and/or failed to factor many traditionally male forms of housework. The mass media also virtually ignored subsequent studies that disproved the housework myth. For instance:

A recent 25-nation study by economists from Berlin, Brussels and Texas, which included rich and poor nations, found men do as much work as women when all types of work are combined.

A University of Maryland study found the total workloads of married mothers and fathers is roughly equal when paid work is added to child care and housework, at 65 hours a week for mothers and 64 hours for fathers.

A University of Michigan study found women work an average of 11 hours more housework per week more than men while men an average of 14 hours per week more than women outside the home.

10/31/2009 10:32:37 AM
Surely as a "journalist" Ms. McLaren should be obligated to back up her sweeping statements with facts, yet she fails to provide even one example of a woman being paid less than a man doing the same job with the same levels of eduation and experience. Sadly, there is a huge gender gap in salaries at my kids' school. Let's get Leah involoved and she can expose this terrible inequity. However, neither she nor any other journalist would be interested in this example because it's the men earning significantly less than the women. Of course, the women are all administrators, speech pathologists and teachers and the men are custodians and bus drivers, but we don't have to mention that because it would sound better to whine about unequal pay than to print the whole truth which is that people are paid in accordance with their education level, job responsibilities, experience and a number of other factors that don't include gender.

Then only statistics Ms. McLaren provides are those that back up the fact that girls are out performing boys educationally. Yet, she brushes this aside as a reason to offer special programming to help boys succeed in school because it doesn't fit in with her agenda. Here's a wild idea: schools should strive to help every student achieve her (or his) personal best whether it's politically correct to admit a certain population needs extra help or not.

There are so many other sweeping generalizations in this article, that I don't know which to address next. Families I know do not adhere to the 1950's model where the woman does all the housework and childcare. Even in homes where the woman is a stay at home mom, the dads work fulltime, mow the law, shovel the snow, take the kids to extra-curricular activities and help out with housework. I know lots of people, and I've just never met a family where the woman works fulltime and does everything around the house, too. But I guess if Leah says it's so it must be true.

10/31/2009 10:35:10 AM
"If you want proof, just look at the plight of women in the developing world. Of the roughly one billion people who live in extreme poverty, 70 per cent are women and girls."

Why do victim feminists continue to use third world examples as "proof" of the problems for women in modern democratic world countries. Maria Shriver admitted that America is "A woman's nation"

10/31/2009 10:40:48 AM
Women should work harder and for less. This is simply the proper order. Men need their rest so they can enjoy their leasure time. They also need their space so they can reflect on the bigger issues.

10/31/2009 10:46:23 AM
"In this new world order, women get to support their partners, remain the primary child-care givers and earn less money for doing the same jobs as men. See? Promotion without compensation."


Fathers have historically been denied equal parenting rights with mothers. The 19th Century “tender years” doctrine explicitly gave mothers presumed custody for children age 13 and younger. Even after being replaced by the “best interests of the child” doctrine, the tender years doctrine still thrived.

As late as 1971, the Minnesota State Bar Association’s handbook advised lawyers and judges that “except in very rare cases, the father should not have custody of the minor children. He is usually unqualified psychologically and emotionally.” Time Magazine, 11/11/03, “Father Makes Two,”,9171,1101011119-183968,

Today, fathers usually ask for 50% custody while mothers ask for and usually get 80% custody, and fathers are relegated to visitors and must pay high child support with hardly any enforcement of their parenting time. The myth that fathers get custody when they ask for it 70% of the time has been repeatedly debunked. See Cynthia McNeeley, “Lagging Behind the Times, Parenthood, Custody and Gender Bias in the Family Court,”

Research overwhelmingly shows father involvement is a very important part of a child's development, behavior and well-being.

It also shows fathers are equal with mothers in nurturing instincts and capabilities.

10/31/2009 10:50:31 AM

Canadian Research supports Equal Shared Parenting.

Research on joint custody laws in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany that controls for pre-existing levels of conflict strongly supports presumed joint physical custody.

Although we often hear about "deadbeat dads," maternal gatekeeping (maternal resistance to father involvement) is a significant contributing factor to the shortage of father involvement.

Most men would quit their jobs or lower their pay if their partner could support the family.

Dad's are even stigmatized for taking parental leave or denied equal rights to take it.

An Urban Institute study entitled “What About the Dads?” found that CPS case workers attempted to contact fathers of children at risk in their mothers care only a little over half the time. That was true even though they knew the father’s identity in 86% of cases.

Fathers are also frequently subjected to false accusations and restraining order abuse in order to gain an advantage in divorce or custody. The California State Bar has expressed concern about the rising abuse of restraining orders in divorce.

10/31/2009 11:26:17 AM
This article encompasses much of what's wrong with our society. Fifty years ago, a few radicals with bones to pick convinced millions of women that a domestic life equates to slavery and subjugation. Ever since, women have been looking for fulfillment wherever they think men get it: power, money, sexual conquests etc...

It's now widely acknowledged that the strategy has failed, but no-one seems to realize why. I think it's obvious : Men and women both find fulfillment the same way. By being happy with who and what they are, and living healthy and productive lives.

It's always the last place you look...

10/31/2009 11:31:06 AM
Yup, this is true in my world. I'd rather be home sipping martinis...b/c someone tricked me when I was young into believing a career was what I should have. LOL

11/1/2009 9:32:52 AM
MBGuy wrote: There is nothing forcing women to marry men who won't do a fair share of the family's work. I think too many women just don't find anything wrong with a guy being lazy until several years into a relationship.

There is nothing to stop a man/woman from being lazy several years into a relationship. Why work hard when you get rewarded with half of everything upon divorce?

Grant Brown: The lesser interest principle

The “lesser interest principle” states that the person who has the lesser interest in maintaining a relationship sets its terms. The reason is simple: any possible fissures in the relationship will be perceived as more threatening by the party with the greater interest in the relationship

In Canada's family law system, women seem to have all the benefits, with hardly any of the burdens. Who gets custody of the kids? She does. Who gets alimony? She does. Who is liable to have their reputation destroyed? He is. Men and women don't enter divorce and family courts on an equal footing: Men walk in presumed guilty, having to prove their innocence, and women walk in presumed to have suffered much

Even men who do nothing legally, morally, or prudentially wrong stand to lose everything upon separation: custody of their children, possession of their homes, and a large chunk of their incomes. The law is set up to allow women to continue on with the children after separation as much as possible without breaking their stride. Thus the suicide rate remains constant for women after separation, but increases four- to six-fold for men. Men do--and should--very much fear the legal consequences of divorce for their psychological and financial well-being. Much moreso than women, in most cases.

No comments: