nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Fourth wave feminism.

Sweetemotion

What is all that about?

We have our national papers giving columns, to people like Louise O Niell and Rosemary Mc Cabe.

Both activists for Womens rights in Ireland and the Repeal the 8 campaign.

The only argument now in Ireland they have left, is the right to abortion.

After repeal the 8 is granted is that the end of feminism in Ireland as we all have equal rights?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

professore

arse..biscuits wrote: »

If an employer can hire women to do the same work for way less pay, why would anyone hire men?

I was talking to a fellow man last week at the patriarch business owners of ireland and he was telling me how embarrassed he was when he discovered a woman was being paid the same as a man for the same work.

He immediately awarded the man a 20% pay rise. Last week he fired his top salesperson because her bonuses would have meant she earned more than the top salesman.

Winterlong

professore wrote: »

Last week he fired his top salesperson because her bonuses would have meant she earned more than the top salesman.

I know the man. He told me that he made her make tea for all the males in the office before she left the building.

mzungu

Mokuba wrote: »

Ask any feminist the definition of the word and they will mistakenly say - belief in equality between the sexes.

So by their own logic areas in which men are disadvantaged should be just as important. Unfortunately the vast majority of "feminists" couldn't care less about any male plight. If they were at least honest in their intentions it might be easier to have some respect for them.

I think when the line about "equality" is trotted out, it is done so for PR purposes, and little else. It means the interview won't get bogged down in discussions about mens rights or about the principles of true egalitarianism etc. I think most people who identify as feminist - that don't have a media presence - would be the first to tell you that it is a movement specifically for women, and rightly so IMO. As always, the clue is in the name.

I think the onus is on society to take the "equality" line with a grain of salt, and realise that changes need to occur within the mens movement to drive it onwards.

mrsdewinter

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

Bredabe

I campaign for equal rights for men, especially in terms of their children,
I can understand that some women in the middle east dont want to have to change from their traditional clothing, if they can do their job in it, why should they?

I've never taken maternity leave, but I was still paid the same as women who did, was fobbed off when I asked why. It was only when I moved job to the UK was I given pay parity. My younger generation in Ireland are still not being paid the same salary in reality as their male colleagues in some jobs, with the same conditions.

mzungu

mrsdewinter wrote: »

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

Bashing? Really? The last page has been about what men need to do to fix things like the "pay gap". Also, women with no children out earn men with no children by 17% up to the age of 30. After that, the age when most women will start a family and be out of the workplace, causes a huge bulk of the difference.

Nobody is making the argument that it is tough luck if you want a family. I think extending fathers rights so they can raise their children if they so wish, will be of great help to both.

[Deleted User]

mrsdewinter wrote: »

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

Maybe males make up the between candidates for those particular jobs. You for want gender quotas do you?

[Deleted User]

machiavellianme wrote: »

Looking forward to some parity. Sick of seeing female colleagues getting a six month paid holiday to have a child while I'm slaving in the office with no option for the same.

Hilarious. As a man who has just become a father and is entitled to 2 weeks paid paternity leave (introduced in Sept 2016), I'd rather be at work so won't be taking the government up on it. I also like the fact that instead of staying in the same room as the newborn and being woken up every 30 minutes I have the freedom to go into another bedroom and sleep through the night. How many mothers, who are apparently not "slaving", have this freedom?

It could only be an unmarried, childless man who has not had to mind children who dismisses the work of child rearing. Work is a holiday compared to the tempermental torture of babies who are unable to communicate except by crying and who decide when you can sleep, when you can wake up and how much work you can do at home (usually absolutely none).

The people who get most riled up about "feminism" consistently come across as not having a clue of the real world, as never having grown beyond their own little mé féiner interests to a position of being able to care for somebody else.

The one, outstanding issue where men are discriminated against is regarding access to the children in the event of a break up. Other than that serious issue, the whole anti-feminist movement is perpetrated by a false sense of victimhood by the most emotionally undeveloped of males on the lookout for a scapegoat for their own failings.

[Deleted User]

Feminism used to mean equality. There was a legitimate need and want for it in so worry. Nowadays, this new age 3rd and 4th wave stuff is honest to god just as much about targeting men as oppressors and deviants in the making as it is about equality. It's mostly a load of cods wallop IMO. If someone in 2017 feels the need to label themselves as a feminist on social media or in real life, then that's the type of person I'd generally want to avoid.

professore

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hilarious. As a man who has just become a father and is entitled to 2 weeks paid paternity leave (introduced in Sept 2016), I'd rather be at work so won't be taking the government up on it. I also like the fact that instead of staying in the same room as the newborn and being woken up every 30 minutes I have the freedom to go into another bedroom and sleep through the night. How many mothers, who are apparently not "slaving", have this freedom?

It could only be an unmarried, childless man who has not had to mind children who dismisses the work of child rearing. Work is a holiday compared to the tempermental torture of babies who are unable to communicate except by crying and who decide when you can sleep, when you can wake up and how much work you can do at home (usually absolutely none).

The people who get most riled up about "feminism" consistently come across as not having a clue of the real world, as never having grown beyond their own little mé féiner interests to a position of being able to care for somebody else.

The one, outstanding issue where men are discriminated against is regarding access to the children in the event of a break up. Other than that serious issue, the whole anti-feminist movement is perpetrated by a false sense of victimhood by the most emotionally undeveloped of males on the lookout for a scapegoat for their own failings.

I'm a dad with kids, and you're right, but no group values raising children less than fourth wave feminists.

mrsdewinter

Omackeral wrote: »

Maybe males make up the between candidates for those particular jobs. You for want gender quotas do you?

What's a 'between candidate'?

Help!!!!

mrsdewinter wrote: »

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

But have those women been in the company as long as the men? You cannot expect to get paid the same as someone who's been with the company years longer ( that goes for men & women )

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

the whole feminist movement is perpetrated by a false sense of victimhood by the most emotionally undeveloped of females on the lookout for a scapegoat for their own failings.

That can be made to fit too.

silverharp

mrsdewinter wrote: »

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

and? men and women take different degrees in different numbers and take different jobs in companies in different numbers. If you take a high tech IT firm for instance, isnt it reasonable that the IT engineers will rise to the top of that type of company because most will be male. so yep the pay gap is pretty much a myth.

diomed

machiavellianme wrote: »

Looking forward to some parity. Sick of seeing female colleagues getting a six month paid holiday to have a child while I'm slaving in the office with no option for the same.

Just take up the slack. Its only for a few months. :pac:

Bredabe

silverharp wrote: »

and? men and women take different degrees in different numbers and take different jobs in companies in different numbers. If you take a high tech IT firm for instance, isnt it reasonable that the IT engineers will rise to the top of that type of company because most will be male. so yep the pay gap is pretty much a myth.

I was in admin before, same working hours as my male colleagues, different pay for the same qualifications. While in Ireland it seems to be true that men in IT get the promotions and pay because of their numbers, from what I hear from ladies getting up the ladder in IT, they are given very little hope for pay parity till there are more of them to force a change.

The opposite situation in my part of the UK, cause of the different attitude to education and gender.

silverharp

Bredabe wrote: »

I was in admin before, same working hours as my male colleagues, different pay for the same qualifications. While in Ireland it seems to be true that men in IT get the promotions and pay because of their numbers, from what I hear from ladies getting up the ladder in IT, they are given very little hope for pay parity till there are more of them to force a change.

The opposite situation in my part of the UK, cause of the different attitude to education and gender.

Most western countries have equal pay legislation and at the end of the day if women would work for 20% less than men then there is a business opportunity to setup all female companies and you will kill the competition

No idea about your anecdotal examples , it would be illegal to have a policy to pay men more than a woman for the same position so either the male employees are more pushy when they accept a job or there is something about their work experience that allows them to be paid more. Having a qualification you may have received 10 years ago isnt going to be the only or even main decider on pay.

soups05

it is funny how there is a push for more women in the higher paid jobs like CEO and IT, but you never see a campaign to attract more women to lower paid jobs, like for example rubbish collection, coal mining, street sweeping. Could it be that women only want the jobs viewed as being cushy? surely not lol.

Bredabe

silverharp wrote: »

Most western countries have equal pay legislation and at the end of the day if women would work for 20% less than men then there is a business opportunity to setup all female companies and you will kill the competition
No idea about your anecdotal examples , it would be illegal to have a policy to pay men more than a woman for the same position so either the male employees are more pushy when they accept a job or there is something about their work experience that allows them to be paid more. Having a qualification you may have received 10 years ago isnt going to be the only or even main decider on pay.

I cant explain it either, but its what i experienced and what i hear from ppl working in such areas's in Ireland.

am well aware it's not legal, but when women who query why they paid less than a male colleague are told its cause (in one case) he had a different qualification to you, even tho it wasnt, Im sure you know in Ireland, where there is a rule there are many exceptions!

Im sure as soon as there is pay parity and proper housing/child minding facilities, more women will be able to save to set up their own businesses, I did it and loved it for a while.

As for anecdotal, its the way I write, I dont on my off time write in business english, but thank you for not being the sort of w£$k%r who dismisses what I say on the basis of varying opinions and writing styles. Rare in my short time in boards.ie

suicide_circus

mzungu wrote: »

but they mostly seem to be threading water.

*twitches*

Pac1Man

Is there an article or evidence out there stating that men get more pay for the same job, with the same qualification, with the same amount of experience?

Ush1

You know who gets paid less? Bad negotiators.

johndaman66

mrsdewinter wrote: »

Great. Another 'feminist-bashing' thread on AH. To all those men who think the gender pay gap is a myth, not every woman has children, yet women are underrepresented at the top levels of pay, so the argument that 'well, take a year off to have a baby, and that's what you get...' doesn't hold much water.

What you don't seem to acknowledge very well there is that if a considerable proportion of women decide to leave the workforce to concentrate on child rearing or lower skill part time jobs after starting a family (as happens) ....be it their own choice or a mutual decision with their Partners then there naturally won't be as many female candidates with the skillset for these top paid jobs in the first place. That is assuming a close to 50:50 split in population between male and female as tends to be the case over a wider population.....well women will marginally out number men as the age goes up...certainly up to retirement age.

[Deleted User]

mrsdewinter wrote: »

What's a 'between candidate'?

Sorry I meant to type best candidate. Auto correct kicked in. My whole post looks like drunk text actually. Apologies.

frag420

Well they do say a woman's work is never done...perhaps that explains the wage gap!?

One eyed Jack

soups05 wrote: »

it is funny how there is a push for more women in the higher paid jobs like CEO and IT, but you never see a campaign to attract more women to lower paid jobs, like for example rubbish collection, coal mining, street sweeping. Could it be that women only want the jobs viewed as being cushy? surely not lol.

Yes it could, I never see what's so silly about that? You don't see a push amongst men for lower paid jobs either, because they're shìte jobs with shìte career prospects, so why wouldn't we encourage young people to want to aim to achieve more for themselves?

As I always understood it, feminism was about women's welfare and political, social and economic equality with men, where women weren't treated as equal to men. I think the feminism that advocates for men's rights is more of a recent phenomenon and it makes about as much sense to me as "male feminists" do.

The whole "gender pay gap" stuff is a load of nonsense because it's based on how you spin the figures, include the bits that suit, leave out the bits that don't, as if pay is the sole determining factor in evaluating a persons value to society.

I think feminism as a nebulous concept is it's own worst enemy because there are now so many, many, many different types of feminism which are all vying for attention in what's become a pretty crowded space, because they're all fighting for different things, and there's no cohesive movement any more. That's why IMO the kind of strides that feminism made for women historically speaking, will never be seen again.

As for the idea of feminism that advocates for men's rights, I don't get that at all, I can understand women advocating for women and children, but for stuff like "fathers rights"? I use the words "fathers rights" in inverted commas because the only rights I can think of where men were historically unequal to women was the issue of guardianship rights, where women were conferred with automatic guardianship of children (notwithstanding historically when women were sent to homes and their children taken from them with little or no consequences for fathers unless the woman could prove in a court of law that a man was the father of the child, very difficult thing to do in 1830's Ireland).

But that's all changing now with marriage equality where guardianship rights will become as much a women's issue as it is a men's issue, so it would be a parental rights issue rather than one that solely concerns either gender.

I never bought into the whole equality nonsense anyway if I'm honest because for me there was never and can never be any such thing as everyone being equal regardless of this, that and the other. It's idealistic at best. I was always much more on board with the idea of fairness and a meritocratic society, regardless of a persons particular identity traits.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

How many mothers, who are apparently not "slaving", have this freedom?

You seem to think this is the only objection.... and TBH I doubt any man raised by his mother could say that it isn't hard work. My father was home a lot of the time, while we out of school, and he helped out immensely.... still bloody hard work raising three children.

It could only be an unmarried, childless man who has not had to mind children who dismisses the work of child rearing. Work is a holiday compared to the tempermental torture of babies who are unable to communicate except by crying and who decide when you can sleep, when you can wake up and how much work you can do at home (usually absolutely none).

Yup. I'm 40 years old, single, never married, male, and i've never had children. I made the choice in my twenties that I wouldn't marry and, being slightly traditional, never really considered children out of wedlock as an option. So. here I am. A unmarried man with no children, and I'm incredibly content with that choice/decision.

I've also been a Kindergarten teacher and helped my married friends (and my brother/sister) with their kids. Which just reinforced the idea that both marriage and children required way too much commitment taken away from the life I wanted to lead.

The people who get most riled up about "feminism" consistently come across as not having a clue of the real world, as never having grown beyond their own little mé féiner interests to a position of being able to care for somebody else.

There are idiots and extremists in every group. Feminists or on the male rights side.

But in any case, you're deciding everything from your life choice. You chose to get married. You chose to have children. And with that choice comes a demand for time to be invested away from a career and instead a focus on the responsibility to your family. Single people usually don't have those demands on our time or commitments to a family group... and therefore, we work more.

We work to get paid. We work for promotions. We work to get to higher positions, with greater authority and all those lovely little perks. And we know that getting that promotion will guarantee even less time in our private lives, (at least until we hit the 50 age bracket, and can start grooming a replacement).

You married into a family. Single people typically marry into their careers.... and it's fair to be angry when you work for months while someone is out on pregnancy leave, and she comes back (and your months of work are now to be considered unfair to her when the performance review comes up?)

I've experienced this a number of times. If I had been out sick, then it would be acceptable that I'd lose score/competition against my colleagues.... If I went out doing a contract job outside the company while on leave, I'd also suffer the same loss. However, A woman can get pregnant, and have a child (or many more), and her situation is guaranteed by law... even to the case of coming back prior to performance reviews.

The one, outstanding issue where men are discriminated against is regarding access to the children in the event of a break up. Other than that serious issue, the whole anti-feminist movement is perpetrated by a false sense of victimhood by the most emotionally undeveloped of males on the lookout for a scapegoat for their own failings.

You're a parent. You'll put priority on issues that relate to your situation. Personally, I think child custody and child support are major issues. Not so much for myself (although a mistake is always possible :eek:), but for my friends who have experienced this side of things. However, don't dismiss the other issues because they no longer concern you... They're all unfair... and reasonable objections.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I respect 2nd wave feminists.

The new versions are too unhinged from reality for me. A lot of denial of nature and propagation of pseudo science going on.

Mrs OBumble

soups05 wrote: »

it is funny how there is a push for more women in the higher paid jobs like CEO and IT, but you never see a campaign to attract more women to lower paid jobs, like for example rubbish collection, coal mining, street sweeping. Could it be that women only want the jobs viewed as being cushy? surely not lol.

I wonder who gets paid more, street sweepers or home care / childcare workers?

( I leave rubbish collectors out of it: they're actually some of the most important health care workers in most communities. )

DEFTLEFTHAND

There's actually quite a big gender imbalance in the bin collecting profession.

Women should strive to break down that wall and take their place in the industry.

Also in the other male dominated trades like fishing and fixing sh1tters and sewer systems.