Generation Wuss and related crap
09-18-2016, 01:54 PM
#302
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Detroit (the part with no rules or laws)
Posts: 5,677
Total Cats: 800
Why do people engage and provoke these SJWs?
A simple "mine your own damn business" and walking away would have totally sufficed.
Do these people have anything better to do? Do these people have jobs, hobbies, places to go, things to do? **** man, my life is WAYY to damn short to give two ***** about what kind of hat someone has on.
A simple "mine your own damn business" and walking away would have totally sufficed.
Do these people have anything better to do? Do these people have jobs, hobbies, places to go, things to do? **** man, my life is WAYY to damn short to give two ***** about what kind of hat someone has on.
Reply
0
0
09-18-2016, 02:19 PM
#303
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
Why do people troll web forums?
Why do people deface the inside of subway cars?
Why is "abbreviated" such a long word?
Why is the third hand on a watch called the second hand?
Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
Why isn't there mouse-flavored cat food?
Why is there a lock on the door of the 7-11 that's open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year?
Why is Donald Trump running for president?
Why do they call it a TV set when you only get one?
Why do people deface the inside of subway cars?
Why is "abbreviated" such a long word?
Why is the third hand on a watch called the second hand?
Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
Why isn't there mouse-flavored cat food?
Why is there a lock on the door of the 7-11 that's open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year?
Why is Donald Trump running for president?
Why do they call it a TV set when you only get one?
Reply
0
0
09-19-2016, 09:04 PM
#310
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
The following isn't technically a purebred manifestation of Gen-Wu, but its smug and self-righteous attitude without regard for facts or context is definitely cut from the same cloth:
So... here's what confuses me.
We all know that corporations are evil, greedy, and care about nothing other than profits. So, if women are that much cheaper to employ than men, for the same net work output, then why isn't the unemployment rate among men 100%? Any organization motivated by profit should hire nothing but women for all positions, including executive roles. Just imagine instantly lopping 20-30% off of your payroll costs with zero impact on productivity and none of the stigma associated with off-shoring: it's a shareholder's dream!
So... here's what confuses me.
We all know that corporations are evil, greedy, and care about nothing other than profits. So, if women are that much cheaper to employ than men, for the same net work output, then why isn't the unemployment rate among men 100%? Any organization motivated by profit should hire nothing but women for all positions, including executive roles. Just imagine instantly lopping 20-30% off of your payroll costs with zero impact on productivity and none of the stigma associated with off-shoring: it's a shareholder's dream!
Reply
0
0
09-19-2016, 10:19 PM
#312
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
But that doesn't tell the whole story.
For starters, women tend to enter lower-paying career fields then men, across all levels. Compare the typical male : female spread in people who pursue college degrees in education / social work / literature / gender studies vs. those who pursue engineering / accounting / computer science. Like it or not, some people deliberately choose to enter fields of study which lead to employment in fields which, on average, pay less than others.
And it gets even trickier. Take a field of study which, on average, is at the higher-paying end of the career spectrum, which attracts roughly equal numbers of male and female matriculants, and in which neither physical ability nor STEM education is particularly vital: Law.
While in law school, I was exposed to quite a lot of opinions and information concerning various legal careers. And my takeaway here is two-fold.
First: women were much more likely than men to express interest in legal careers which involve public defense, family & marital law, pro-bono / indigent services, etc. These jobs might give you some sense of civic pride, but they pay for ****.
Second: among those who do pursue corporate law (contracts, patents, compliance, etc), there exist two basic career paths. The first is derogatorily known within the industry as BigLaw, in which one works for a large firm which bills its corporate clients by the hour. As an example, in the book & movie The Firm, the lead character worked for a BigLaw firm. In this field, you live and die by the number of billable hours you generate per year. The hours are insane, you're basically on-call 24/7, and the burnout rate is high.
Then, by contrast, you have House Counsel. Big corporations have their own in-house attorneys who handle most of the routine day to day stuff. It can be a tad dull, but you live a pretty normal life. It's mostly 9 to 5, no travel, pretty much like any normal office job.
I'm not saying that house counsel pays especially badly, but it's the kind of job that BigLaw attorneys gravitate towards after they've made partner, stockpiled a few million, and are looking to slow down and enjoy life. A male friend of mine out in CA, about my age, who was a BigLaw attorney in NYC and later LA, took a job about a year ago as house counsel at Mitsubishi after he was diagnosed with congestive heart failure and the doctors basically told him flat-out that he was going to die if he didn't slow down.
Now guess what the gender distribution of 3rd year law students who pursue employment in one field vs. the other is?
That same trend holds true across most professional fields. It may sound sexist, but recruiting data confirms that females are much more likely to prioritize things like a predictable work schedule and flexible hours over raw salary. I've seen it myself; broadcast engineering (like most other engineering fields) is very much a sausage-fest, and the very few female job applicants I've interviewed seemed a lot more interested than average in things like work schedule and vacation time, and were willing to make concessions to get them.
So, yeah, as a broad generalization, women do earn less than men. They choose to.
How to "fix" this? Simple: refuse them admission to academic programs which lead to lower-paying salaries, and discriminate against them during the hiring process by denying them concessions related to flexibility in scheduling and time off. Sounds fair, right?
Reply
0
0
09-20-2016, 06:54 AM
#313
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
We all know that corporations are evil, greedy, and care about nothing other than profits. So, if women are that much cheaper to employ than men, for the same net work output, then why isn't the unemployment rate among men 100%? Any organization motivated by profit should hire nothing but women for all positions, including executive roles. Just imagine instantly lopping 20-30% off of your payroll costs with zero impact on productivity and none of the stigma associated with off-shoring: it's a shareholder's dream!
Reply
0
0
