Because GG IS "apartheid level oppression of women." something, something something, Stockholm Syndrome blah blah *sigh* whatevs

It has been a long time since I've seen somebody so stupid as to deny 'patriarchy' exists.

Good lord.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/

http://time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/time-to-ditch-this-obsession-with-the-gender-pay-gap/16759#.VTqIwJOHncs

The gender pay myth debunked... by women themselves.

Is there actually any place you know of (like your own workplace for example) were women are paid less for doing the exact same job as a male? all my female collegues get the exact same pay as the males.


You know i could say the exact same sentence but in reverse. So right back at you.

First I'd like to ask, you did take that text from HBB about infiltrating the nerd/geek community serious?

I'd like to quote this from the linked article:

"The Honey Badgers are a diverse group of female gender apostates–women who oppose outdated ideas of gender, particularly the association of womanhood with weakness. We offer an alternative to the damaging portrayal of women as victims of geek and gamer culture.”

Alison expressed that from the perspective of being both a woman and a comic artist. She had been given permission by the panel to answer the question, the panel agreed with her.

But at the same time they felt harassed?

"It appears that was their plan for the expo, to come and to loudly take over the spaces of other people – although it was not violent or threatening, it’s disrespectful, disappointing and offers a prime example of why these panels need to exist in the first place."

Seems I missed the "loud" part in the panel discussion. I wonder how it can be disappointing? Because somebody did not roll with one's opinion that is now a reason for getting thrown out. Having another opinion is now disrespectful? Having/expressing another opinion calls for panels being held?

With all the stories I heard/read/watched the last months. If this is the current state of free speech on the continent, you people should take a serious look at Germany in the 1930s.

Still, this is just the beginning. People are shoving their dicks into this debate who actually claim patriarchy has never ever existed, at no point in history, in no country of the world. People claiming to be historians.

It is interesting how numbers and statistics are used and interpreted in these debates. A few arguably good arguments and a few arguably bad arguments brought forth against the extent of the gender pay gap are supposedly "proof" that it doesn't exist at all.

In the same vein, a 2014 study that made clear how actually little the core/casual preferences of women and men differed, and how strong the group of female 'core' gamers has become was prominently used to "disprove" the latter by ignoring the first.

Ironic the person claiming others take information out of context. I thought you already won the gold medal for that...
Of course makes so much sense quoting a MRA you hate to somehow counter-prove a patriarchy exists.
Let's see if I get this straight...
MRA talks about patriarchy.
MRA claims it exists
MRA gets many facts wrong
Thus "proving" patriarchy exists.

Faulty logic for sure...

As to gender wage gap....

Conclusion of the forward for my link
"Although additional research in this area is clearly needed, this study leads to the unambiguous
conclusion that the differences in the compensation of men and women are the result of a
multitude of factors and that the raw wage gap should not be used as the basis to justify
corrective action. Indeed, there may be nothing to correct. The differences in raw wages may be
almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers. "

Conclusion of the beefy part
"As a result, it is not possible now, and doubtless will never be possible, to determine reliably whether
any portion of the observed gender wage gap is not attributable to factors that compensate women and
men differently on socially acceptable bases, and hence can confidently be attributed to overt
discrimination against women. In addition, at a practical level, the complex combination of factors that
collectively determine the wages paid to different individuals makes the formulation of policy that will
reliably redress any overt discrimination that does exist a task that is, at least, daunting and, more
likely, unachievable."

What part of this implies a gap at all?
They have accounted for most of the official gap and know of other factors that cannot be readily quantified which will skew it further, possibly to the point it does not exist.

There is still the question of whether there is a gap at all, not extent.
The factors which can be reliably quantified reduces the gap to between 92.9 and 95.2 cents on a dollar. Average of about 94 cents.
Factors which are not factored in which are known to have an effect include job tenure; work experience; and wage compensation factors (non-monetary benefits). These very well may account for the last 6 cents but cannot be adequately determined.
So again, what gap?

If that's what they believe why did they say the ban was due to disruption, misrepresentation and breaking of rules? Why the bullshit excuses instead of flat out saying, "we don't like you", or "we are afraid of you".

It's the dishonesty mate... You guys don't say the truth because deep down you know you're acting pathologically, not rationally...

"THE PATRIARCHY" as third wave feminists present has NEVER existed. Are you actually reading the sort of nonsense that they write on their blogs? According to them, all men conspire against women as if there's some HUGE 3 billion secret club of men that get together to screw women over.

In reality, things are a lot more nuanced. For example, when a guy is married, it's usually the wife who has the final say over big decisions. Is that patriarchy? And yes, in politics it's mainly still men - because it's mainly men who step forward to be in politics. Just like in jobs, CEOs tend to be male, because there aren't many career women. We're seeing a slow improvement but mainly because it's WOMEN who make the needed steps, not because men keep them down. In Belgium where I love, politic parties have been begging for more women in their parties to show you a good example. Many big corporations will gladly hire a woman over a man because it's good PR and so on. So the whole "OMG patriarchy oppresses us poor women" is bullshit. Those times are gone.

cheers, I will have a proper read of it during the week and come back to you. But at a glance, I can see sentences like "unexplained variables" in there.

Shhhhhh guys don't post. The patriarchy is looking.....................

People like Fever_Discordia and Vainamoinen demonstrate why feminism (and MRAism) is a fundamentally flawed concept.

Let's look back in time. A woman like Marie Curie, who was born in Poland as Maria Sklodowska, was unable to study in her home country, simply because she was a woman. She had to leave for France to do that. That's bullshit, we know that she was more than capable enough to do it, and Poland lost a fantastic scientist for no good reason.

Now fast-forward in time, women have all the same rights as men do, so what now? Do feminists pack their stuff and get real jobs? Of course not, if you have invested so much time and energy into feminism you have no useful skill. Once feminism became the establishment they were no longer interested in solving problems, they are interested in creating problems so they can sell the solution. That is why we have lies like gender paygap or why feminists are doing their hardest to discourage girls from pursuing STEM and getting into gender idiology while at the same time rallying against STEM faculties.

Make no mistake, if MRAism gets the upper hand the exact same thing will happen, but in reverse. This is a fundamental problem when you have a one-sided viewpoint.

I would like to see some evidence of this, because funnily enough, in STEM subjects at schools and Unis the gender gap is reversed, girls do better boys on average.

then why the "need" for something like girls only science clubs? If boys do worse on average, the girls shouldn't feel threatened.

I did see a video about this but can't find it ATM.

that's a very good question, indeed.

On Gender Gap in STEM fields. Enjoy the wall of text.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/24/perceptions-of-required-ability-act-as-a-proxy-for-actual-required-ability-in-explaining-the-gender-gap/