Page 2 of 70 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 1043
Like Tree642Likes

Thread: Political Correctness Gone Mad

  1. #16
    Global Moderator harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,897
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    By all means make the law equal for men and women in terms of splitting maternity/paternity, but let's not pretend the societal norm is a sexist concept. It exists because of nature, because in most cases it's what the mother wants.
    Has a lot to do with conditioning as well. Both factors are important, and indeed form a feedback loop. Think what is now being tried is to try and break the conditioning loop and see where that leads us.
    ~ Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference ~

  2. #17
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Spikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    All Glory To The Nev
    Posts
    45,132
    oh no
    Fred Tetanus likes this.
    http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blo...cricket-legacy

    Brad McNamara ‏@bbuzzmc
    Will say this once and then nothing else. Defamation laws quite clear in Aus.be careful.

  3. #18
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    514
    Posts
    29,332
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    By all means make the law equal for men and women in terms of splitting maternity/paternity, but let's not pretend the societal norm is a sexist concept. It exists because of nature, because in most cases it's what the mother wants.
    Because of nature or because we've been conditioned this way?
    StephenZA and Fred Tetanus like this.
    ​63*

    Quote Originally Posted by Howe_zat View Post
    Come on Lancashire!
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Let it be known for the record that the font in the top of the picture noted that Kohli was wearing Jimmy Choo shoes and Happy Socks

  4. #19
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    27,386
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    By all means make the law equal for men and women in terms of splitting maternity/paternity, but let's not pretend the societal norm is a sexist concept. It exists because of nature, because in most cases it's what the mother wants.
    Nature is sexist as **** tbf.


  5. #20
    Cricket Web Staff Member Howe_zat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Top floor, bottom buzzer
    Posts
    26,996
    Nature can **** off tbh. If your argument comes from nature you can spend a year living as a leopard and see how well it treats you

    We've got past nature. That's what society is, y'know, for
    I get a nod, the tiny smile that doesn't come with teeth
    Maybe you don't know who I am

  6. #21
    Global Moderator vic_orthdox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    29,022
    No such thing TBH...
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  7. #22
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Howe_zat View Post
    Nature can **** off tbh. If your argument comes from nature you can spend a year living as a leopard and see how well it treats you

    We've got past nature. That's what society is, y'know, for
    Aw man I just lost my reply

    CBF to type it all out again. Getting past nature means that if a man and woman want to swap the traditional roles then they should be able to. It doesn't mean we condemn the fact that for many new mothers (I'd probably argue most) their desire is not some conditioned motive but an instinctive human nature that makes them feel their new job is their most important job. There's nothing wrong with that; it's not sexist that more women than men stay at home with their kids.
    Ausage and Fred Tetanus like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  8. #23
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    45,861
    Isn't it completely impossible to make that assessment until you're sure that women aren't coerced or pressured with the threat of negative social consequences to do so?
    zorax and Fred Tetanus like this.
    do you think people will be allowed to make violins?
    who's going to make the violins?

    forever 63*

  9. #24
    Global Moderator harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,897
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Aw man I just lost my reply

    CBF to type it all out again. Getting past nature means that if a man and woman want to swap the traditional roles then they should be able to. It doesn't mean we condemn the fact that for many new mothers (I'd probably argue most) their desire is not some conditioned motive but an instinctive human nature that makes them feel their new job is their most important job. There's nothing wrong with that; it's not sexist that more women than men stay at home with their kids.
    There is no way you know this to be true, as of now at least.

    It's what everyone learns from childhood. Can't separate that from wherever that instinct is coming from.
    indiaholic and Fred Tetanus like this.

  10. #25
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,608
    I'm sure that there are women who feel that way. I wasn't arguing otherwise; my point is that it's not the reason why most of them do it. My wife went back to work when our twins were one and wound up asking me two years later what I thought about her jacking it again until they were full-time at school. This was because she felt it was what they needed, what was best for them, based on behaviours and situations at that time. When they were born, had I ever suggested being the stay at home dad, she'd have laughed at me. Not because of societal pressures but because it would be ludicrous for both of us to do it that way round. The house, bank balance and kids would all have suffered. There were no societal pressures and she quite frankly wouldn't give a **** if there were.

    My sister, after having her son, never wanted to work again while he was a baby and always loved her job. She went back for the £$£, if they could have made it work I'm sure she wouldn't. Society didn't make her feel like she wanted to stay at home. It's just absurd to suggest it.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  11. #26
    Evil Scotsman Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    514
    Posts
    29,332
    Nobody is condemning mothers for feeling that way.

    It is a fact that if you have children in the UK, it is easier for the mother to take the decision to stay at home initially than it is for the father. While I am sure that the majority of mothers would want to stay at home with their new baby, the length of time a lot of working mothers will take off is forced on them by inadequate leave provision offered to new fathers. The length of time a lot of mothers take off work will also impact career progression.

    This sort of stuff is why gender pay gaps exist (interestingly the gap in pay has disappeared amongst those in their 20s) and it's why glass ceilings exist in the workplace that women struggle to fight against. The 3 most prominent political leaders in Scotland and the Prime Minister are all women; I don't think it's a coincidence that all 4 are childless when the last 3 male Prime Ministers were all fathers.
    zorax and Fred Tetanus like this.

  12. #27
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Furball View Post
    Nobody is condemning mothers for feeling that way.

    It is a fact that if you have children in the UK, it is easier for the mother to take the decision to stay at home initially than it is for the father. While I am sure that the majority of mothers would want to stay at home with their new baby, the length of time a lot of working mothers will take off is forced on them by inadequate leave provision offered to new fathers. The length of time a lot of mothers take off work will also impact career progression.
    Okay, I disagree that nobody is condemning them. That article briefly acknowledged that she had 'agency' but the connotations were clear.

    That aside, I think I already said (unless it was in my lost post) that I'm alrgely with you. If you've got a statutory allowance, then sure, why discriminate. It should be readily available to one or the other, or indeed as you appear to be suggesting, shared if need be. 4.5 months each. 6 for one, 3 for the other - whatever. I don't disagree.

    That being said, I'd be shocked if a change in the law led to a massive change in the situation. I'm not saying there wouldn't be any - but I don't think it's a societal norm because of the law, or the reasons suggested by others about coercion and other such concepts.

    This sort of stuff is why gender pay gaps exist (interestingly the gap in pay has disappeared amongst those in their 20s) and it's why glass ceilings exist in the workplace that women struggle to fight against. The 3 most prominent political leaders in Scotland and the Prime Minister are all women; I don't think it's a coincidence that all 4 are childless when the last 3 male Prime Ministers were all fathers.
    I won't go into the gender pay gap because it'll open up a whole other discussion (unless there is a real desire to tackle that can of worms on CW) but we've only had two female PMs and one of them was Thatcher, who managed to become PM as a woman in 1979 and did have kids. I don't think using a more modern example of the fact the current one doesn't really means anything at all. Because whatever we all think, we;d be hard pressed to disagree that women as homemakers as a stereotype has faded, not grown, since the iron lady.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  13. #28
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    27,386
    It can sound quite disrespectful to say that someone's decision to look after their child is 'socially conditioned'. Almost definitely true to some extent when applied to societies, but a bit offensive when applied to individuals.

    It's sometimes tough to advocate for workplace equality without implicitly undermining the status of full-time mothers. Humans just organise themselves into hierarchies, and when they try to break up one they always accidentally create another.
    GIMH, hendrix, indiaholic and 3 others like this.

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    53,792
    My first wife didn't go back to work for six years after the twins were born.

    Six. ****ing. Years.
    Ikki and Fred Tetanus like this.

  15. #30
    International Captain Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    6,871
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.ag View Post
    Has a lot to do with conditioning as well. Both factors are important, and indeed form a feedback loop. Think what is now being tried is to try and break the conditioning loop and see where that leads us.
    While both (all) factors are important, the more you strip away societal/economic factors the more prominence the biological factors get in a decision. There's a reason Iran has a much much higher proportion of women in STEM than Norway and I doubt it's that Norwegians are more sexist as a society. Gender disparity seems inevitable in a world where all non biological factors have been stripped away unless you're going to argue there's literally zero biological difference between the sexes.

    The fact is we have the capacity to test this stuff, but the proclivity for clickbait articles means that certain lines of inquiry (eg, biological factors in gender disparity in the west) are basically taboo. It's not illegal, but the possibility for a clickbait article materialising an angry mob calling for your job (or worse) at your doorstep means the risk simply isn't worth it. Academia is sick and it's a big big problem for our societies.
    zorax, indiaholic and Fred Tetanus like this.
    Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.

    Too many bones, not enough CASH!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEHMbJ_FVfA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5oGJTUpbpA

    RIP Craig

Page 2 of 70 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-01-2017, 09:51 PM
  2. America/Buzzfeed's version of political correctness...
    By hendrix in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-01-2017, 09:51 PM
  3. Political Correctness
    By Slow Love™ in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 17-11-2005, 07:31 AM
  4. Political stance?
    By sledger in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 125
    Last Post: 11-10-2005, 04:43 PM
  5. Disgusting! Political Correctness gone wrong!
    By Robertinho in forum Site Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 20-04-2005, 12:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •