• Isoprenoid@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This data is the World world, not just “America world”.

    Also, if men are going right, then the left needs to step up their offering.

      • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Correct. Why would anyone go for a worse option for themselves?

        Edit: A benefit to one group does not mean a detriment to others. This is not a zero sum game.

        The funny thing is that the left could offer so many things for men:

        • address mental health issues
        • paternal leave / support for fatherhood
        • Less dangerous work
        • rehabilitation in prisons
        • a free lamborghini
        • address homelessness

        All of which are mostly men issues.

            • Glitchington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              You’re not wrong, but the wage gap? Not going to close if we give everyone a raise. It would be the same wage gap.

              • hakase@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’m pretty sure that by this point most reasonable people have realized that the wage gap is a myth, so that’s probably not your best example.

                  • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    In addition to being less likely than men to say they are currently the boss or a top manager at work, women are also more likely to say they wouldn’t want to be in this type of position in the future. More than four-in-ten employed women (46%) say this, compared with 37% of men. Similar shares of men (35%) and women (31%) say they are not currently the boss but would like to be one day. These patterns are similar among parents.

                    The wage gap exists because women have reasonable expectations for work-life balance (one reason). Men are culturally expected to rise and grind.

                    This isn’t the win that wage gap enthusiasts think it is. It’s essentially saying:

                    Wanna get paid more? Be a corporate whore.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                The gender pay gap is insignificant and inconsequential compared to the income differences between working and owning classes. Also, much of the pay gap is due to men culturally tending to not have the option of escaping the grindset. “Honey I’m going to quit my job and do something that doesn’t alienate me, yes it’s going to pay less” is not something universally accepted by wives.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        While this is true, it’s also true that pendulum swings can go further in the opposite direction than equality.

        While a trite example, in the recent Barbie film, at the end when things are going back to the seemingly good way, the men in Barbieland ask if they can have a seat on the supreme court and are told no, which is then explained as Barbieland being a mirror to the real world such that as there’s increased equality in the real world then equality for men in the mirror would increase.

        Apparently the writers weren’t familiar with the fact there’s four women on the supreme court right now and a woman has been on the court since 1981 (around twice as close to the creation of Barbie than to the present day).

        Even in the context of its justifiably imbalanced equality it failed to be proportionally imbalanced.

        There’s interesting research around how the privileged underestimate the degree to which the good things that happen to them are because of privilege, but that at the same time the underprivileged overestimate how often the bad things which happen are because of bias. In theory both are ego-preserving adaptations. But it also means that either side is going to have a difficult time correctly identifying equality from their relative subjective perspectives.

        • oatscoop@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          While a trite example, in the recent Barbie film

          You mean self aware, hyperbolic satire?

          They know there have been women on the supreme court. It was a reference to second wave feminism, and inverted because that was the joke.

        • Glitchington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It was a film about plastic dolls from a corporation trying to seem less like a big bad corporation. If you’re using the Barbie movie as evidence in an actual philosophical debate around other human beings having equal rights, you have bigger problems in life.