Institutional Sexism
Forum rules
We tolerate extreme views, assuming no actual discrimination against board-members occurs. We will let snowflakes melt from the heat.
We tolerate extreme views, assuming no actual discrimination against board-members occurs. We will let snowflakes melt from the heat.
Institutional Sexism
I present to you: Alimony
Did you know that only 3% of men receive spousal support in divorce? Why is this injustice not brought up more often? Is it because men are the victims?
Did you know that only 3% of men receive spousal support in divorce? Why is this injustice not brought up more often? Is it because men are the victims?
- Reign in Blood
- Administrator
- Posts: 9456
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 11:29 am
Re: Institutional Sexism
Because by and large, men make more money, and even in the cases they don't, women have been oppressed. A woman could be fucking the pool boy for years, when she wants to call it off, you'll still get dicked harder than her.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”
Re: Institutional Sexism
Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.Foo wrote:Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”
Re: Institutional Sexism
The way society is evolving, that is surely a conversation that is past due.showa58taro wrote:I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.Foo wrote:Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
http://family.findlaw.com/divorce/spous ... asics.html
Do you have any evidence of men being denied the support despite being in that position?
Do you have any evidence of men being denied the support despite being in that position?
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
I’d expect to see an increase in alimony going forward for some men as “stay-at-home-dad” becomes socially acceptable and women face less overt sexism in the general society.Foo wrote:The way society is evolving, that is surely a conversation that is past due.showa58taro wrote:I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.Foo wrote:Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10952
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: Institutional Sexism
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
Re: Institutional Sexism
"Mirasolo was sentenced to one year in the county jail but only served six and a half months before early release so he could care for his sick mother, Kiessling said.Headhunter wrote:http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... 106374256/
“She (client) and her family was told first-time sex offenders weren’t sent to prison because people come out worse after they go there,” said Kiessling.
In March 2010, Mirasolo committed a sex assault on a victim between the ages of 13 and 15 years old. He served only four years for that second offense, Kiessling said."
Liberals at their finest. Instead of locking them up, they keep them on the street.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
Re: Institutional Sexism
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.Foo wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.
Re: Institutional Sexism
Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?showa58taro wrote:So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.Foo wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.Foo wrote:Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?showa58taro wrote:So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.Foo wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.
- Reign in Blood
- Administrator
- Posts: 9456
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 11:29 am
Re: Institutional Sexism
Who the fuck is Jason B. and what the fuck does he have to do with anything?showa58taro wrote:Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.Foo wrote:Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?showa58taro wrote:So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.Foo wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
What? Is this one of those insider jokes I’m not meant to get?Reign in Blood wrote:Who the fuck is Jason B. and what the fuck does he have to do with anything?showa58taro wrote:Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.Foo wrote:Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?showa58taro wrote:So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.Foo wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam
It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.
Re: Institutional Sexism
at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: Institutional Sexism
Damn it Z. Way to ruin the counter-joke.zombie wrote:at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.
Re: Institutional Sexism
i'm not yet conscious enough for humor.showa58taro wrote:Damn it Z. Way to ruin the counter-joke.zombie wrote:at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.