The Logic Off Topic list

Thoughts from the mind of GAmoore@..., 10-11-2001:

>  >There are many articles claiming the opposite.  So "I think" this one
>>article of yours might not be a very persuasive argument.
>>
>>>And in any area where there is a clear difference, there would be clear
>>>grounds for a lawsuit and humiliation for the company conducting such
>>>practices.
>
>Honestly, have you actually seen an article in Europe showing that in any
>particular line of work, women with the same years of experience, and
>same education get less pay?

Yes, quite some time ago (years, not decades).

>If you can show me some clear statistics about the US or Europe I 
>will stand corrected.

I wouldn't be able to rpoduce any specific references.

>  >Yes, that's indeed probably part of the story.  Still it's silly that
>>2 people doing the same job get a different salary, solely depending
>>on their degree.  But that's a whole topic in itself, I'm afraid...
>
>That has nothing to do with male/female.

Except that men still tend to be higher educated than women, as you 
yourself wrote.  For the rest: indeed, it has little bearing on the 
subject.

>  I think it does make a huge
>difference - because there are huge differences in the level of
>difficulty and level of learning in different colleges - at least here in
>the US - and i think its the same in Europe. Someone who can go out
>drinking every weekend or every night and barely study and get C's will
>not be as productive worker as someone who went to top universities and
>graduated with honors - even if the same two people had identical talent
>to start with. ... At least this applies to areas where productivity is
>important - such as research or programming. When it comes to people
>skills, such as teaching, then it doesn't matter so much.. and indeed
>teachers are not paid differently depending on the calibre of their
>school, but programmers were when I was doing it.

People should be paid depending on their job-description and 
possibily on their performance.  Not depending on the diploma's they 
happen to have.  But hey, that's just my opinion.
As for the distinction productivity/people-skills you make; I don't 
agree at all.  If in some lines of work people get paid more when 
they're more productive, then some teachers should also get paid more 
than others.  Some teachers are simply horrible, both socially and 
didactically, while others excel in their profession.  That too is a 
kind of "productivity".

>  >>On the other hand, men (in the US) contribute a great deal more
>>>around the house, to the kids, to the cooking, to the shopping, etc.
>>
>>And women contribute a great deal more to the family's bank-account.
>>What's your point?
>
>Sometimes! Women frequently have the option of taking several years of
>break from the working life when they tire of it. Men usually don't have
>that option.

Maybe this is a typical US-related issue, I don't know, but it all 
doesn't really ring a bell or sound familiar.

>  >>And in the dating arena, women still want
>>>the guy to pay (depending on the woman) EVEN WITH EQUAL PAY.
>>
>>In the US maybe.  Not so over here.  And the few that do are the
>>wrong kind of women :-).
>
>Now we're getting somewhere! I can be over this January if you can show
>Kool, Bashar and myself around and introduce us to a couple of women!  ;->

No problem, you're welcome.  I hope you realise January is mid-winter here.

>  >Which imo is bollocks.  These women most often work there out of free
>>will,  They could have been waitresses or whatever, but being a
>>stripper pays better.  I don't blame them.  Hell, I would maybe do
>>the same if I even remotely had the body for it :-).  Sure beats a
>>teaching-salary.  LOL!
>
>I heard that these women make $50,000 - $200,000 from tips - so pretty
>much tax free. But would you really want the mother of your children to
>know the view from the stage of strip bar?

Ho ho... I didn't say that I particularly fancy the kind of women who 
choose to make money by showing off their bodies.  I jst said that I 
can't blame them,and that it's most often out of free will and 
opportunism thatthey take such jobs.  I.e. they're not really 
exploited in the "feminist" sense.

>  >These men _choose_ to step into a role of sex-object.  Most likely
>>_they_ don't mind at all -- otherwise they would have found a
>>different job.
>
>I'm not talking about the guys doing it. Hell, for $200,000 I'd be
>shaking my ass too.

See, that's what I meant.  But, do you really think _anyone_ would be 
willing to pay serious money to see either of our shaking asses? :-)

>  I'm talking about society. Young girls frequently
>talk about guys in purely physical terms "washboard abs", "cute ass" etc.
>Now, I realize that cute asses where not recently invented, but what
>happened to "cute smile" or "good heart"? I think society is getting
>cheaper - we value physical things more than the really important stuff -
>like how much money a guy has in his pocket (just joking). And its not
>just America - I see a lot of young Asian kids - and its the same thing.

Be very careful not to step in the trap of manyadults, complaining 
that "these modern youth... and in *my* time everything was better 
...".  When I was 18, some 20 years ago, I too was mainly interested 
in good looking girls, getting drunk and getting laid, just as my 
students today are.  Nothing much changed, in essence.  Sure, the 
girl I fancied most was always a _nice_ girl too (or so I thought), 
but that's still true today.  Whenever I have a gorgeous female 
student who happens to be arrogant and irritating, most boys aren't 
interested in her at all -- despite the looks.  So again: nothing 
much changed.

On the other hand, I _do_ share your feeling that society at large is 
getting more superficial in many respects.  This seems to contradict 
what I said in the previous paragraph, I know.  Maybe the catch is in 
the "nothing much changed" -- which is not the same as "nothing 
changed".  E.g. while in a sense (described abobve) modern 
adolescents resemble myself when I was 18, I also think I sport a 
difference.
Example: in "my time" (yuck) a party meant: being together with 
mates, getting drunk slowly, and having "deep" conversations about 
the meaning of life and such (preferably talking with the cutest 
girl, impressing her with your wisdom and then get laid at the end of 
the party :).  Nowadays it seems to mean: go to a place where the 
music is so loud that any conversation is impossible from the onset, 
drink a lot and take a lot of pills that make you more horny 
thanyoualready were, and then get laid at the end of the party.
Same goal, but rather differentn means...

>  ><plop> lose association -- on the news today: UNICEF has warned that
>>in 6 months (or was it weeks?  I think so...) 100.000 children in
>>Afghanistan will die because of malnutrition and the harsh winter.
>>Talking about "lows"...
>
>That is a sad prediction.

Yes it is.

>I know the US is also shipping food through Iran, to Afgan refugees, 
>and is dropping 40,000 rations on Afganistan every night.

Another sad fact: the US used cluster bombs on populated areas (!) 
and some of the small bombs didn't explode.  They were bright yellow. 
The US food packets were... bright yellow as well.  Hence the US now 
has changed the color of the food packets to blue.

War is madness.

>I think we can all agree that the sooner it ends the better. I want 
>the war to stop, and I am not comfortable with my own government's 
>casual attitude about taking two years

Glad to hear that.


tata,
HJ
-- 
     Hendrik Jan Veenstra
     email: mailto:h@...
     www:   http://www.ision.nl/users/h/index.html