Triceratops Ballet wrote: » Yes but it's about choice, ...
Zulu wrote: » Which is exactly what happened in Sweden. IIRC, they had to force couples for men take a portion of the leave. Of course there's an argument that men simply wouldn't take it, but I believe the reality is more that couples continued to choose to let the mothers have it.
Sleepy wrote: » I'm by no means arguing against doing so but even if the governmet could be persuaded to grant men equal parental leave, does anyone really think that women wouldn't still be the majority of primary care givers? No doubt it would improve the gender balance somewhat but there'd still be two major issues maintaining an earnings gap between men and women: 1. IME, far more women *want* to be stay-at-home parents or do drop to part-time hours in order to spend more time with their kids than men. 2. Most women still want to "marry up" (or at least marry men of equal earning capacity as themselves). Unless a couple earn enough to pay for a full-time nanny (not something most of us can do) one, or the other parent will still have to become the primary care-giver who works shorter hours, takes more leave to deal with sick kids etc. If women aren't partnering up with men who earn less than themselves in much larger numbers, there's little economic incentive for the status quo to change: women will still tend to take on the primary care giver role in higher numbers than men.
titan18 wrote: » Ya, our place had Edel House in for it. Feck if I'm giving money to a charity that discriminates against men. Company was all show how great women are in there, and it's a place where it's a vast majority female anyway, so it's not like they needed to do it. Nothing for International Mens Day of course, or like they'd even think of doing it.
iptba wrote: » Here's the latest batch of gender-related hashtags I have noticed trending for anyone interested (I know some are not) (Aside: I'm not on Twitter 24/7 of course and don't look back at lists for when I wasn't on) IMESUP@TIMESUPNOW: The TIME’S UP Legal Defense Fund provides subsidized legal support to those who have experienced sexual harassment, assault, or abuse in the workplace. #TIMESUP Comment: This description seems gender neutral but other descriptions have focused only on women from what I recall e.g.https://twitter.com/TIMESUPNOW/status/965377018815766530https://twitter.com/TIMESUPNOW/status/965280075439595520https://twitter.com/TIMESUPNOW/status/952696960733057024 #IWD2018 International Women's Day 2018https://twitter.com/SolaceWomensAid/status/964193906614308864 #SocialJusticeDay Gender is mentioned quite a lot but pretty much exclusively women/females only mentioned.https://twitter.com/UN_Women/status/965731498681827329https://twitter.com/UN_Women/status/966003315518697473https://twitter.com/KevinMajoni/status/965929237118058496https://twitter.com/ActionAid_Kenya/status/965801803404234752https://twitter.com/ActionAid_Kenya/status/965921122356269056 International Women's Day #IWDCCD Accenture Ireland @Accenture_Irl International Women’s Day in the Convention Centre Dublinhttps://twitter.com/Accenture_Irl/status/970962142777266176 International Women's Day-related hashtags have been trending a lot over the last week or 2
Encouraging equal parental leave, instead of just maternity leave, could entirely mitigate any negative impact on women's advancement in the workforce after having children, new research has suggested. Implementing maternity leave alone is likely to hold women back from career progression, but when companies encourage parental leave for men and women, the negative impact on women's advancement is cancelled out completely, the research by Accenture and published ahead of International Womens' Day tomorrow found. The 'Getting to Equal 2018' report identified what it said are 40 key factors to foster gender equality in Irish workplaces, including that gender diversity is a priority for management. Equal parental leave for men and women, scrapping dress codes and having a diversity target were also found to be among the most influential factors in supporting the progress of women. The research was based on a survey of 22,000 working people in 34 countries - including more than 700 in Ireland. It measured perceptions of factors that contribute to their workplace cultures. The majority (59pc) said they work in organisations that don't have a women's network, but women do better where one is active. And the research said three times more women are on the fast-track in companies that already have at least one female senior leader.
Calhoun wrote: So are you trolling? or are you a feminist? is there a reason why people interest in mens rights are losers?
TheAnalyst_ wrote: » Why are men into mens rights by and large complete losers? That would turn many off from even considering the subject.
DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: » You can't just throw somebody into a leadership role because they're a certain gender. The person with all the required attributes of a leader should be upped, regardless of what sex they are.
iptba wrote: » The manifesto includes "prioritise women's access to senior positions at leadership positions in the sciences". Such initiatives can lead to discrimination against males. You may not find it of interest, but I think it can justifiably be seen as something males might be interested in. I will give you that the Galentine's day trend may not be particularly interesting or important.
(Irish Times, February 14) Hosting Amateur Championship at male-only Portmarnock does golf no favourshttps://www.irishtimes.com/sport/golf/hosting-amateur-championship-at-male-only-portmarnock-does-golf-no-favours-1.3391882
Harvard University Bans Single-Gender Clubs — Unless They're Women-Onlyhttps://www.dailywire.com/news/26802/harvard-university-bans-single-gender-clubs-unless-emily-zanotti#exit-modal
Koala Sunshine wrote: It's the hypocricy, such groups supposedly champion equality, yet their actions say otherwise.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » If you think there should be a corresponding '"is your girlfriend a bit obsessive" tweets yadayada', then start one. I wouldn't be bothered either way. But I can't understand the animosity towards the ' other side' when they achieve something that you would also like.
Single Dads Have Higher Risk for Premature Mortality By Amy Orciari Herman Edited by Richard Saitz, MD, MPH, FACP, DFASAM Single fathers have a higher mortality risk than partnered fathers or single or partnered mothers, according to a Lancet Public Health study. Researchers used Ontario health and mortality databases to study roughly 900 single fathers (living with a child under age 25), 4600 single mothers, 16,000 partnered fathers, and 19,000 partnered mothers. During a median 11 years' follow-up, single fathers had the highest mortality rate (5.8 per 1000 person-years), followed by partnered fathers (1.9 per 1000), single mothers (1.7), and partnered mothers (1.2). At baseline, single fathers generally were older (average age, 46), ate fewer fruits and vegetables, reported more binge-drinking, and were more likely to have cancer, compared with the other groups. However, even after adjustment for these factors, single fathers had more than a twofold higher mortality risk.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Spot on. I listened to an American show discussing male circumcisions and the host said 'yeah but foreskin is fcuking ugly' . And a point which seemed to carry weight was that circumcised men wanted their son to look like them. It would down to cosmetic surgery on an infant's genitals. Mental stuff.
silverharp wrote: All for this this backwards procedure to be banned, if no society had ever practiced it and someone suggested it today you would be thrown in a loony bin. Interesting to see if it passes as some other Nordic countries have been pondering the issue. I believe once the age of consent is reached they are free to make their choice so overall a reasonable compromise.
The proposal has been put forward by Progressive Party MP Silja Dögg Gunnarsdóttir and is backed by several other Icelandic politicians. Circumcising girls has been illegal in Iceland since 2005, but there is no provision for boys, Gunnarsdóttir told Euronews. The bill proposes a six-year prison term for anyone found guilty of “removing part or all of the [child’s] sexual organs”. Gunnarsdóttir said she was acting on advice issued by children’s ombudsmen in five Nordic countries. They said in 2013 that “circumcision without a medical indication on a person unable to provide informed consent conflicts with basic principles of medical ethics, particularly because the operation is irreversible, painful and may cause serious complications."
Deleted User wrote: Or the various research (US stats admittedly) that shows that there are plenty of girls in teen relationships who are violent towards their boyfriends. It's not on par with male violence, but that doesn't remove the possibility that your girlfriend might be violent... and that there should be some acknowledgment of that. But hey! Let's pretend that violent behavior by females isn't happening (by not referring to it, or pushing it into the background noise) and focus entirely on the males. Go Equality!
silverharp wrote: it was "is your boyfriend to into you" tweet that caught my interest. surely its a subject both sexes could have a problem with that as perp or victim? my hot take on it is that it falls into the formula of tell boys not to do things and warn girls about what boys can do. where are the "is your girlfriend a bit obsessive" tweets yadayada?
silverharp wrote: » it was "is your boyfriend to into you" tweet that caught my interest. surely its a subject both sexes could have a problem with that as perp or victim? my hot take on it is that it falls into the formula of tell boys not to do things and warn girls about what boys can do. where are the "is your girlfriend a bit obsessive" tweets yadayada?
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » That’s such a cynical way to see it. I think most posters here would be happy to see an international day of men in science to celebrate the men who make big contributions. Supporting your mates on Valentine’s Day is at least harmless.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » That’s such a cynical way to see it. I think most posters here would be happy to see an international day of men in science to celebrate the men who make big contributions. Supporting your mates on Valentine’s Day is at least harmless. If men want more attention, fine. If not, fine. So why the animosity towards trending women’s issues? Jealousy or what?
silverharp wrote: » ^^ the only positive thing is the lack of interest in their tweets
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)