Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

11920222425203

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Since when? Friend of mine (mid-twenties) had his lopped off in hospital shortly after he was born.

    It's the reason for the popularity of circumcision in America as well.

    Not sure when it changed but it can't be done now unless there is a real medical case for it.


  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Not sure when it changed but it can't be done now unless there is a real medical case for it.
    Odd, thought it would've gone the other way if anything.

    Though I'm sure it's one of those things that it's not too hard to find "medical" justification for.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,159 ✭✭✭mrkiscool2


    Was having a discussion in a bar one night with a few gentlemen and we were discussing rights. One of the guys said he was a feminist and I commented that I hate the word feminism and associate more with equalism. I put forward the argument based on a number of points (the main ones being that if any right movement has a single "sex" in it, it can't be advocating equal rights, and that feminism has taken up the place of chivalry in the western world)

    So, along pops a female who has heard me and tells me, and I quote "To check my privilege, I was lucky being born a man as I don't have to deal with being a second class citizen, being objectified by all members of the opposite gender (because apparently gay men also find women hot), having less pay for equal work, being the victim of 90 percent of rape and domestic violence and not bleeding out of an orifice every 28 days" (She had a point on the last one)

    So I try to explain that actually domestic violence is around 50:50, the definition of rape automatically skews it so that it's really only men that can be perpetrators, women actually get paid more out of college and the reason the figures are different is mostly due to men taking jobs that put them in a higher risk of injury (hence better pay) and that in social interactions with an intent at being sexual women hold all the power. She then proceeds to throw her drink in my face, hit my multiple times and scream at me. I am then asked to leave by a bouncer as "It would diffuse the situation". I am shocked but comply with the request so as not to cause a scene.

    Then tonight I meet a friend of said female. She had texted him saying that she was getting the ride of some fella later that evening. That fella was my friend and when I informed him of said text he had no idea that was her plan. Hypocrisy, thy name is you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,844 ✭✭✭py2006


    mrkiscool2 wrote: »
    She then proceeds to throw her drink in my face, hit my multiple times and scream at me.

    Because it is socially acceptable for a woman to behave this way towards a man. We live in a society today where criticism of feminism or even criticism of a woman is not acceptable.

    I have numerous experiences where criticism of feminism or a particular woman is met with great offense by other women. The whole how dare you criticize 'one of us' mentality. Even if the criticism is completely warranted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    Why wasn't the girl put out of the pub??

    If a guy spilled a drink on a girl you can be damn sure he'd be barred !


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    Why wasn't the girl put out of the pub??

    If a guy spilled a drink on a girl you can be damn sure he'd be barred !

    I agree. I know our first instinct is to probably withdraw but realistically he should have demanded that she was thrown out of the pub and potentially the police called as she assaulted you. Unbelievable that people can get away with this type of behavior with no consequence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    Playboy wrote: »
    I agree. I know our first instinct is to probably withdraw but realistically he should have demanded that she was thrown out of the pub and potentially the police called as she assaulted you. Unbelievable that people women can get away with this type of behavior with no consequence where as a man would be punished heavily.

    FYP


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    Flora Mini Marathon.

    Enough said.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Flora Mini Marathon.

    Enough said.

    I ran that last year and there were male runners :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I ran that last year and there were male runners :confused:

    Yes but they are not allowed to compete or earn medals or register officially

    Whereas women can register and officially participate in the mens arc mini marathon


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    maybe
    mrkiscool2 wrote: »
    Was having a discussion in a bar one night with a few gentlemen and we were discussing rights…when I informed him of said text he had no idea that was her plan. Hypocrisy, thy name is you.

    So you happened to have a conversation about feminism with a friend when a girl happened to walk by and assault you because of it who happened to be a friend with one of your friends who happened to show you a text from her that was written in relation to another friend of yours about riding him? That is an incredible story!!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,586 ✭✭✭ahnowbrowncow


    No
    eviltwin wrote: »
    I ran that last year and there were male runners :confused:

    https://apps.florawomensminimarathon.ie/online-entry/login.asp

    You must have missed where it says "Please note that this event is for women only, and that all entrants you include here are Women. Men may not compete in this event."


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    So you happened to have a conversation about feminism with a friend when a girl happened to walk by and assault you because of it who happened to be a friend with one of your friends who happened to show you a text from her that was written in relation to another friend of yours about riding him? That is an incredible story!!!

    Small world?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,541 ✭✭✭tigger123


    Flora Mini Marathon.

    Enough said.

    Don't guys enter this every year in drag?

    Also, by extension, aren't all sports events that are divided by gender equally sexist?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    tigger123 wrote: »
    Don't guys enter this every year in drag?

    Also, by extension, aren't all sports events that are divided by gender equally sexist?

    Yes but what I'm trying to say is that the Full marathon is open to everyone, men and women and the women have a women's prizes list and the men have one for them.

    The men's arc mini marathon is open for all (incl women) despite the fact that it is called mens mini marathon.

    The women's mini marathon is women only.

    if the men's mini marathon explicitly banned women it'd be shut down on grounds of sexism.

    Imagine telling women that they have to dress like a man to participate in the arc marathon ??


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,646 ✭✭✭✭Sauve


    My brother has entered the Flora 10k under his own name and won't be doing it in drag.
    Nobody has raised any issues with him over it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,949 ✭✭✭✭IvyTheTerrible


    Sauve wrote: »
    My brother has entered the Flora 10k under his own name and won't be doing it in drag.
    Nobody has raised any issues with him over it.
    AFAIK he won't get an official time or a medal.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 77 ✭✭All Hail President Murphy


    And it's the point that it publicly excludes men. I'm going tot start a men only marathon. Let's see how it goes.

    And excluding 49% of the country form raising money from charity is sick and childish and really shows where some people's priorities lie.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,949 ✭✭✭✭IvyTheTerrible


    And it's the point that it publicly excludes men. I'm going tot start a men only marathon. Let's see how it goes.

    And excluding 49% of the country form raising money from charity is sick and childish and really shows where some people's priorities lie.
    I've always felt uncomfortable with the Women's mini marathon. I could have understood it if when it started, the Dublin marathon only allowed male entrants but the Dublin marathon has always been mixed, and it started 3 years before the mini marathon.


  • Registered Users Posts: 535 ✭✭✭ALiasEX


    Someone on the panel of Midday on TV3 today got called a sexist. I didn't here what she said so I don't know it the viewer was correct or not. What I did hear was interesting, though. Not one of the panel knew what the "female version" of misogyny is called.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,610 ✭✭✭newport2


    ALiasEX wrote: »
    Someone on the panel of Midday on TV3 today got called a sexist. I didn't here what she said so I don't know it the viewer was correct or not. What I did hear was interesting, though. Not one of the panel knew what the "female version" of misogyny is called.

    They probably genuinely beleive that nobody in the world hates men, hence no need for the word.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,898 ✭✭✭iptba


    newport2 wrote: »
    ALiasEX wrote:
    Someone on the panel of Midday on TV3 today got called a sexist. I didn't here what she said so I don't know it the viewer was correct or not. What I did hear was interesting, though. Not one of the panel knew what the "female version" of misogyny is called.
    They probably genuinely beleive that nobody in the world hates men, hence no need for the word.
    But it's also a sign of how relatively infrequently the word is used generally (cf. misogyny/misogynist)


  • Registered Users Posts: 252 ✭✭Seriously?


    I think the word misandry is fairly well established these days, so I'm surprised that people dealing with the media claim to not know it.
    But then it smacks a bit like newspeak to me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    I have to disagree with anyone who says male circumcision is not comparable to FMG. I wholeheartedly agree that FMG is worse as a medical procedure because it is more invasive however the fact that male circumcision is so culturally accepted is in some ways worse.

    Every "western" culure views FGM with disdain so it is primarily located to Sub-Sharan countries and parts of the middle east while circumcision is viewed in a far more positive light by most cultures and its effects are far more global. In western countries FMG is not acceptable and is barbaric but in these same countries circumcision is accepted so much it is the cultural norm and it's practise is the most common medical procedure in the world.

    I am taking all my figures from wikipedia and they say 125m women have been subjected to FGM while the WHO believes the global rate for circumcision is 30% of the male population.

    In the US the death rate of circumcision peformed on infants is 1 in 500k which with their rate of birth and circumcision means every year 2 or 3 infant boys die. The benefits of circumcision are debatable and even if they are 100% it should still be left to the child to decide if they want they process when they grow up. 2 to 3 boys are killed without reason or their consent in the US and no one cares as it is considered normal. If we assume the US has the best medical capability then I wonder what the death rate is in many of the other countries that routinely perform it to children at birth.

    In summary when you compare FGM to circumcision in an individual case I fully believe FGM is worse. So in all the countries that practice them FGM is worse, however in the so called englightened western cultures we do not have FGM, we believe it to be barbaric and view the countries that engage in it as backwards yet these very same countries routinely perform the barbaric and backwards procedure of performing circumcision and everyone considers it completely fine and normal so in these countries circumcision is worse because it is accepted and FGM is not.

    I was circumcised as a child as a treatment to an actual condition so as a treatment I think it is fine however I do not believe it is an accetable procedure as a pre-emptive to potential conditions when those conditions are mostly avoidable since condoms have become so widespread and available.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    ALiasEX wrote: »
    Someone on the panel of Midday on TV3 today got called a sexist. I didn't here what she said so I don't know it the viewer was correct or not. What I did hear was interesting, though. Not one of the panel knew what the "female version" of misogyny is called.

    the female version of misogyny is misogyny...
    Misanthropy: hatred/dislike/distrust of humans/people.
    Misogyny: ... of women.
    Misandry: ... of men.

    that's how words work.
    The statements that "all men are bastards" and "all women are b1tches" are misandry and misogyny.
    This is regardless of the gender of the speaker.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,610 ✭✭✭newport2


    kiffer wrote: »
    the female version of misogyny is misogyny...
    Misanthropy: hatred/dislike/distrust of humans/people.
    Misogyny: ... of women.
    Misandry: ... of men.

    that's how words work.
    The statements that "all men are bastards" and "all women are b1tches" are misandry and misogyny.
    This is regardless of the gender of the speaker.

    We weren't talking about the gender of the speaker, but the gender of who it was directed at.

    The original comment was highlighting the fact that these women were not aware that the word misandry existed. Probably should have been phrased as "male version of misogyny" though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,308 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    ALiasEX wrote: »
    Someone on the panel of Midday on TV3 today got called a sexist. I didn't here what she said so I don't know it the viewer was correct or not. What I did hear was interesting, though. Not one of the panel knew what the "female version" of misogyny is called.
    Neither does Google Chrome's spell check...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    newport2 wrote: »
    We weren't talking about the gender of the speaker, but the gender of who it was directed at.

    The original comment was highlighting the fact that these women were not aware that the word misandry existed. Probably should have been phrased as "male version of misogyny" though.

    That's sorta kinda my point... in my understanding they were presenting misogyny as a thing men do. Hence the "female" version would be something women do.

    ... anyway the whole thing is a mess.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    P_1 wrote: »
    Ok so,

    1 - Sweltering day so I decide to wear a vest (wifebeater) to work, apparently that looked 'unprofessional' yet female staff were swanning around wearing half nothing.

    2 - Apparently just because I'm male I couldn't cash up quickly :confused:

    3 - Apparently I didn't have a clue about fashion

    What does "cash up" mean?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    S.R. wrote: »
    What does "cash up" mean?

    Count the money in the till and balance it against the float/sales.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,269 ✭✭✭GalwayGuy2


    Hmmm, would this count as sexism? I saw this pop up on Twitter, and, tbh, it's fairly typical of what's said during and after Women's Day.

    "Women are more likely to die or be maimed as a result of male violence than from war, cancer, malaria and traffic accidents combined."

    https://twitter.com/HadleyFreeman

    I can not be the only one who thinks that's demonizing half the population?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,763 ✭✭✭✭Crann na Beatha


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,872 ✭✭✭✭Panthro


    maybe
    Phoenix wrote: »
    At the canteen in work there are little machines to wash out mugs after they are used.the first day they were installed i placed my cup in the machine and quipped how does this work now a lady pipped up we wouldnt expect you to know how to wash a cup.gobsmacked!

    That's coz your a foreigner!:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,308 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    GalwayGuy2 wrote: »
    Hmmm, would this count as sexism? I saw this pop up on Twitter, and, tbh, it's fairly typical of what's said during and after Women's Day.

    https://twitter.com/HadleyFreeman

    I can not be the only one who thinks that's demonizing half the population?
    I'd love to see the stats supporting such a wild theory too...

    Fair enough, I can see war and malaria causing very few deaths for women since only men are drafted or expected to fight and malaria has been curable for about a century or so but I find it very, very difficult to believe that more women are killed by "male violence" than die of cancer (which stats show 1 in 3 of the general population dying from) or road accidents...


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,423 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    I think her statistic might be true when you look at US women (if you were to exclude cancer), which seem to be her audience. To extend it to a worldwide or historical scale stretches credibility.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,308 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I think it might hold true in the developing world but, especially with America's healthcare problems, I can't see murder being a higher killer than cancer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    Sleepy wrote: »
    I think it might hold true in the developing world but, especially with America's healthcare problems, I can't see murder being a higher killer than cancer.

    Also it's another combined statistic... so more "die or are maimed" but malaria doesn't maim you.
    War and traffic accidents do maim but are we counting violence against women by male soldiers as war or male or both?
    Are we talking world wide or just in America?

    The WHO doesn't list violence of any kind as being in the top ten killers of people in the world but does list traffic accidents/road injury as killing 1.3 million people in 2011.
    Homicide kills 605000 people a year (11% of 5.5million deaths by injuries including accident and self inflicted).

    So road injuries kill more people than men kill.

    Now that says nothing about maimings...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,308 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Yep, just comes across as the typical feminist use of dishonest statistics tbh.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    Sleepy wrote: »
    Yep, just comes across as the typical feminist use of dishonest statistics tbh.

    It's annoying because they're combined to make it a stronger statement but maiming is pretty bad on it's own.
    Now I want to know the breakdown on maiming...
    what counts as maiming?
    The killing park is clearly not the "bulk" of the stat... or the stat is just totally untrue as well as misleading.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,610 ✭✭✭newport2


    Sleepy wrote: »
    Yep, just comes across as the typical feminist use of dishonest statistics tbh.

    They are their own worst enemy, because I think they would have a valid point to make without massaging figures and twisting things to suit their agenda. As a result it gets to the stage where a lot of people are dismissing/ignoring what they say because of BS they tried to sell in the past.

    Like this

    International-Womens-Day-.jpg

    So if men average on 8 hours work a day, then women are doing 16?
    1% of proprty owned by women, conveniently ignoring that the majority of property is owned by couples which usually includes a woman?
    Oh ye, and men get 10 times the pay that women do. Or is that 20 times the pay, considering the allegation that they only do half the hours?
    Even allowing for the undeveloped world, figures like these don't even remotely stack up.

    If they came up with honest stats then I expect they would still have a valid case and get more support for the women they are trying to help.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Sleepy wrote: »
    I think it might hold true in the developing world but, especially with America's healthcare problems, I can't see murder being a higher killer than cancer.

    Her claim is total bull. Its easy to manipulate stats to suit your agenda. The WHO have a detailed list of the main causes of death among women throughout the world, nowhere does violence feature.

    http://www.who.int/gho/women_and_health/mortality/causes_death/en/

    The American Center for Disease Control has their own stats and again, violence isn't anywhere on the list. http://www.cdc.gov/Women/lcod/2009/index.htm

    In fact the only mention of homicide is on the list detailing male deaths.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭kiffer


    No
    "Women are more likely to die or be maimed as a result of male violence than from war, cancer, malaria and traffic accidents combined."

    Female deaths per 100,000 population.
    0.5 war
    101.7 cancer
    21.5 malaria
    10.4 Road injuries
    Total: 134.1 per 100,000

    Female Deaths by violence?
    3.7 per 100,000

    So assuming that all violent deaths of women are caused by men that means at least 131.4 women out of every 100,000 are maimed by a man... but only if none are maimed by car accidents... which I assume some are.

    Now, there are a lot of manky ritual maimings in the world... like FGM... but I'm told that that tends to be carried out by women on women... so does it count for the purposes of statistics?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,898 ✭✭✭iptba


    The issue of homocides comes up in this piece (it's not new but I don't recall reading it before which may mean it hasn't been highlighted here before)

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-men/201010/why-some-people-have-issues-men-misandry
    Why Some People Have Issues With Men: Misandry

    Misandry is not in everyone's dictionary but it's out there.

    Published on October 6, 2010 by Anthony Synnott, Ph.D. in Rethinking Men

    Author: After brief careers in the Royal Navy and the Jesuits, and studies in Rhodesia, the UK and Canada, Anthony Synnott, Ph.D. is now Professor of Sociology at Concordia University in Montreal. He is the author of The Body Social: Symbolism, Self and Society (Routledge, 1993); Shadows: Issues and Social Problems in Canada (Prentice-Hall, 1996); and co-author of Aroma: The Cultural History of Smell (Routledge: 1994), and Re-Thinking Men: Heroes, Villians and Victims (Ashgate, 2009).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    maybe
    "Women are more likely to die or be maimed as a result of male violence than from war, cancer, malaria and traffic accidents combined."
    Actually turns out to be this.
    Globally, women aged between fifteen and forty-four are more likely to be injured or die as a result of male violence than through cancer, traffic accidents, malaria and war combined.
    From here.
    Which seem to cite this speech as it source.

    I couldn't find any breakdown of the figures or any further sources to substantiate the above.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,269 ✭✭✭GalwayGuy2


    So if men average on 8 hours work a day, then women are doing 16?

    Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that statistic that bases household work in the same realm as paid work?

    There's a debate on whether it should be or not, but that may explain that figure.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,543 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    GalwayGuy2 wrote: »
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that statistic that bases household work in the same realm as paid work?

    There's a debate on whether it should be or not, but that may explain that figure.

    That's 100% what they've done. It's a completely ridiculous extrapolation.

    Regardless, this figure is a worldwide figure, completely distorted by cultures in Africa and Asia. It should not be used as evidence of a lack of female equality in Europe.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,610 ✭✭✭newport2


    GalwayGuy2 wrote: »
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that statistic that bases household work in the same realm as paid work?

    There's a debate on whether it should be or not, but that may explain that figure.

    Yes I expect so. Even still, they do not add up.

    I read somewhere that outdoor activities such as gardening, anything involving woodwork etc (any jobs men were more likely to do) were classed as "hobbies" to further skew the figures.


  • Registered Users Posts: 827 ✭✭✭Cian92


    There is one form of sexism that I experience daily at work and it really annoys me.

    I work in a factory and there are a selection of different jobs. Maybe 60% work on machines indoors which while difficult work would be considered the easiest by far in the factory. The next 10% work outside in the yard, another 10% work on machines that require heavy lifting at speed, and the final 20% deal with medical waste - this also requires heavy lifting at speed.

    So the first 60% in easy jobs can be done by anyone males and females. Most try and work in this section as the pay is the same and the job is the easiest.

    However, the other 40% of jobs are only available to men. These jobs are quite difficult and the factory will not allow women to work in these jobs. Apparently women can't work outside, do a job that requires heavy lifting or deal with medical waste. :mad:

    So the males generally do a harder job than the females and get paid the same. :confused: Surely this is a form of sexism?

    Obviously if someone is unable to do the job, they should be put in an easier job, but there are men in there late 50s who really struggle with the heavy lifting jobs and have no choice but to do them. While a fit young female would never be asked to do them.

    It's heart breaking to be discussing with some older men about the different ointments they use to get through the day and the fact that they may not make it to retirement, while a healthy female has a cushy job inside.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    maybe
    GalwayGuy2 wrote: »
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that statistic that bases household work in the same realm as paid work?

    There's a debate on whether it should be or not, but that may explain that figure.

    Ridiculous assumption there, and even if you count it as work it doesnt add up. Assuming like above, that a man works 8 hours, the woman would need to do 16 hours of work/housework a day. Thats not including time spent travelling/eating/resting etc.

    Do they just count every hour a woman spends awake as "work"?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,898 ✭✭✭iptba


    Ridiculous assumption there, and even if you count it as work it doesnt add up. Assuming like above, that a man works 8 hours, the woman would need to do 16 hours of work/housework a day. Thats not including time spent travelling/eating/resting etc.

    Do they just count every hour a woman spends awake as "work"?
    I can't remember where I read it (apologies if it was here) but one of the problems with these analyses of the work men and women do is a paid job, which often isn't fun, is made equivalent with jobs like bringing kids to and from school which, although it can be a chore, is time with your kids and on average would be preferable/most people would swap with a paid job. Of course, I don't accept the women do double-the-work contention.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement