Things that made you Facepalm today (Political Version)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

No. I'm advocating exactly the words I said.

But if that's the argument you're trying to make, then I would argue that in the case of a board member, in at least most boards I've had experience with...physical labor does not seem to be a large part of the job. Most of the pursuits involved are mental, and unless you're claiming that females have less mental capacity than males, then it's really not the same thing, now is it?

---

Watch this video. Start at 5:27. Also, a puppet is involved so it's up your alley.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5Us4wcMtl4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

https://pioneerwoman.files.wordpress.../tootsie21.jpg

Edit to add:

My endorsement of Dustin Hoffman does not constitute an agreement with California's woman on every board law, which is a stupid law. But the fact that it needed to exist in the first place does point out that there's an issue to be addressed. In theory, an average of 50% of board members should be female. If the actual number is low enough to warrant something putting a stupid law into place, there's something the matter.

---

No, theoretically it shouldn't fucking matter what your sex is as long as you're good at your job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

No. I'm advocating exactly the words I said.

But if that's the argument you're trying to make, then I would argue that in the case of a board member, in at least most boards I've had experience with...physical labor does not seem to be a large part of the job. Most of the pursuits involved are mental, and unless you're claiming that females have less mental capacity than males, then it's really not the same thing, now is it?

---

Basically what he's saying is that these women want "equality" until they need to move a refrigerator to the 2nd floor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Basically what he's saying is women want "equality" until they need to move a refrigerator to the 2nd floor.

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

No, theoretically it shouldn't fucking matter what your sex is as long as you're good at your job.

---

This too.

Just get Ross Gellar to tell you when you need to pivot, the womens can get that shit up there!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

In theory, an average of 50% of board members should be female.

---

In theory 50% of people in the high paying field of nursing should be men but they aren't. Do you think the government should make a law mandating 50% of all nurses be men?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

No, theoretically it shouldn't fucking matter what your sex is as long as you're good at your job.

---

And across 100% of people, theoretically 50% of women should be the best fit for the job given their equal mental capacity. It's not totally cut and dry because you see more women drop out of the pool than men for things like child rearing still, but theoretically speaking, as women are equal in mental capacity to men, they should be the best fit for 50% of those available jobs assuming an equal amount in the workforce in a given field.

If the ratio is something stupidly low, which I don't know if it is or not, and that was the cause for a stupid law to be put into place, then yes, all other things equal, something was wrong to prompt a stupid law.

It's murkier water when you get into fields that are male dominated to start with. STEM fields come to mind. If there are 20% females in a field and 80% male, then logic dictates that 20% of the board would be female, assuming equal mental capacity and drive for the work.

Again, I don't know what the actual ratios were to prompt the stupid law, but historically men have risen higher in most fields. It would not surprise me if the ratio was 90% men to women or worse to prompt the law.

I don't agree with the "quota" implementation of the law, which is why I consider it stupid, but it is an issue that should be addressed in some way. In my opinion that way is an improvement to education, but that's neither here nor there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

In theory 50% of people in the high paying field of nursing should be men but they aren't. Do you think the government should make a law mandating 50% of all nurses be men?

---

Coal mines, oil rigs, etc etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

And across 100% of people, theoretically 50% of women should be the best fit for the job given their equal mental capacity. It's not totally cut and dry because you see more women drop out of the pool than men for things like child rearing still, but theoretically speaking, as women are equal in mental capacity to men, they should be the best fit for 50% of those available jobs assuming an equal amount in the workforce in a given field.

If the ratio is something stupidly low, which I don't know if it is or not, and that was the cause for a stupid law to be put into place, then yes, all other things equal, something was wrong to prompt a stupid law.

It's murkier water when you get into fields that are male dominated to start with. STEM fields come to mind. If there are 20% females in a field and 80% male, then logic dictates that 20% of the board would be female, assuming equal mental capacity and drive for the work.

Again, I don't know what the actual ratios were to prompt the stupid law, but historically men have risen higher in most fields. It would not surprise me if the ratio was 90% men to women or worse to prompt the law.

I don't agree with the "quota" implementation of the law, which is why I consider it stupid, but it is an issue that should be addressed in some way. In my opinion that way is an improvement to education, but that's neither here nor there.

---

I'm sure that sounds great on paper. Most things sound on great on paper, and the reality is typically much different for a number of reasons that "expert studies" are useless for.

Also, straight men in porn should be paid the same amount as women and the pay gap is sexist. Reported.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

I'm sure that sounds great on paper. Most things sound on great on paper, and the reality is typically much different for a number of reasons that "expert studies" are useless for.

---

Yes, on paper is really the only place it makes complete sense, which is why implementing a law like that is stupid, which I said right off, and continued to say in every single post. Nonetheless, a problem does and historically has existed in that area that should be addressed.