|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by mcc99 on 10:40 PM May 4th, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
... is here. This one really got my ire up, more than the usual amount, for some reason. Even though I am happily single and childless, it absolutely GALLS me to see this kind of insidiously propagated, anti-paternal misandrust dreck pushed so aggressively. What total and utter crap!!!
There, OK, I'm settling down now...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Davidadelong on 11:06 PM May 4th, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, like anything a Woman does for their family is compared to professional jobs, housekeeper, babysitter etc. What about the working Man that is also a Father, friend, counselor etc.? Oh, I forgot, the Mans training is to provide for his Family, which means he must sacrifice his life to make money, which supports the housewife and "her" brood. Hmmm, no wonder I always required my Women to work. I even told one of my wives, yeah married more than once, (born dreamer) that if she didn't want to work that we could sit on the couch together until we lost everything. She got a job, and I kept mine. I always like to think about the pioneers, if they didn't work together they all starved, now that was teamwork!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Tumescent on 11:19 PM May 4th, 2006 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
This same article gets trotted out year after year, usually about the same time of year--- for what reason I don't know. It's utterly useless, inaccurate, and irrelevant information. If stay at home moms are worth this much then all they have to do to prove it is find someone willing to pay. Good luck ladies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by bull on 11:35 PM May 4th, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Presenting inflated statistics, without benefit of credible citation, is a favorite strategy of radical feminists. It’s obvious to most intelligent members of our species that all they do is lie by omission or cite each other’s dribble, when individually, their finding lack empirical evidence. They should tear-up their PhDs (Pile it High and Deep) for producing such shoddy work. I guess their strategy is effective since they manage to hood-wink gullible politicians?
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by zenpriest on 06:56 AM May 5th, 2006 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
... is paying them on a piecework basis for wiping their own asses?
The reason it is being trotted out at this particular time of year is the "equal pay day" hoax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... like it's been said this gets trotted out every year and everyone with half a brain knows it's BS. The vast majority of people reading it while they should be working their full time job will be earning far less and will therefore correctly blow it off as unrealistic. Their wives (and husbands) sitting at home websurfing when they should be slaving over the stove/kids/housework/etc will just save it for their spouse to come home and say "see what I'm worth?" To which they'll hopefully get a smile and an "I know, honey", and that'll be it.
Of the paper's comments, my favorite: "This is obviously another Christian Right attack on liberal views.". Uh, yeah, OK.
For more intelligent views on the whole thing, check out fark. Sample: "Silly, misogyny isn't stifling. Catholic School is stifling. Misogyny is HILARIOUS."
--
Silence is the voice of complicity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by A.J. on 12:58 PM May 7th, 2006 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
The vast majority of people reading it while they should be working their full time job will be earning far less and will therefore correctly blow it off as unrealistic.
I think the main purpose for this kind of propaganda is to present really wacky ideas so that proposals like “pay equity” laws seem reasonable in comparison. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this gets (re)recycled just when the “pay equity” scam is getting attention again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 01:08 PM May 5th, 2006 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Could someone do a similar survey for fathers using the same "methodology?" I think that the time men spend with their wives would count as being a bodyguard for starters. On top of the salary that they already earn for the family. And don't forget yardwork, car maintenance, and house repairs and maintenance.
I'll bet that fathers come out even higher - using the same bogus methodology as here.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thundercloud on 01:27 PM May 5th, 2006 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
How a bout a kick in the pants, instead?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by oregon dad on 07:00 PM May 5th, 2006 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
He pays for the mortgage, gas, electric, food, car payments, home owners insurance, furniture, fixtures, car insurance, gym dues, special classes and lessons for the kids, cable TV, internet link, retirement, etc...
So what is the problem?
She benefits from all of his work by enjoying all of what he spends on the home.
The idea that she is "getting nothing" is absurd.
She gets the benefit from just living there.
Now - if she did nothing all day long but sit and watch TV - then SHE SHOULD BE PAYING HIM!!!
Seems perfectly reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by canaryguy
(nospam.canaryguy@nospam.stealthfool.com)
on 12:52 AM May 6th, 2006 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
When I look at this idiotic 134k/year figure I keep thinking I could easily do it cheaper and pocket the difference!
Let's see... Prices in Phoenix are...
Housecleaning can be had for $75/week (one visit/week)
Laundry can be done for $0.85 per pound, 30 pounds per week comes to $25.50 per week
Cooking can be done by a professional chef. They'll cook a variety of meals and seal them in plastic, all you have to do pop them in the microwave and 5-8 minutes later... Dinner/Lunch/Breakfast is served! ($10/meal) - $210/week
As children go, a child can be had for about $50000. Get some anonymous eggs, and an Indian surrogate mother (the latest trend, outsourcing surrogate motherhood), you'd be hard-pressed to spend the whole $50000.
For $20-30k per year you can hire a nanny to take care of the kid(s). This includes some shuttling of the kids around town and some minor housecleaning...
All the other stuff the feminazi's claim a woman does would be done by the single man of the house.
Total cost: Around $96K+ (child included)
Seeing a feminist burst blood vessels in her face watching it happen: PRICELESS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 02:31 PM May 6th, 2006 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
This whole "equal pay for equal work" scam by the radical fems is just one more confirmation that feminist women (that would be 99.9% of the normal gals) have a Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Because to believe their "logic," you have to assume that a stay-at-home-mom is producing for society exactly the same VALUE as a woman or man who is dedicating her/his life (career) to cracking the energy crisis, curing cancer, or ending hunger, and making the world somehow better-through-actual-patriarchal-science!
This equal-pay-racket really pisses me off, because women already know they control the world's true currency.
It's a little denomination called "pussy," right?
And all men are slaves to this currency...
Gender Economics 101?
How cum the neo-Marxist fems have never applied Marxist economics to their own ideology?
"Pussy = capitalist overlords."
"Penis = wage-slave underdogs."
Sexual exchange theory (properly understood) is a BITCH!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by canaryguy
(nospam.canaryguy@nospam.stealthfool.com)
on 06:32 PM May 6th, 2006 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
This equal-pay-racket really pisses me off, because women already know they control the world's true currency.
It's a little denomination called "pussy," right?
And all men are slaves to this currency...
Gender Economics 101?
Now lets apply real economics to women.
Price = Demand / Supply, right?
What happens when you increase Supply by killing off men via malign neglect? Price goes down, doesn't it?
What happens when you increase the Price via all the priviledges given to women? Demand goes down, doesn't it?
But then another thing happens. Since the decent men opt for self-preservation and drop out of the mating market, women get discouraged running into fewer and fewer decent men. So the Supply goes down.
And we're back to having the Price of women being held artifically high. Women are overpriced and they only have themselves to blame for being alone.
How much would we drive with $5/gallon gas? $10? $20? The law of supply and demand isn't considered in Marxist Feminist theory...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 07:26 PM May 8th, 2006 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
That is freakin' brilliant!
Though I would also argue that a slight shifting in the supply-side ideology will reveal ---
Price = Illusion / Chivalry!
Of course, Jung never wrote much about economics, so what do I know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 11:57 AM May 9th, 2006 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
...I'd decided against having kids because I couldn't live with a 40% chance of being involved with them when there's a 100% chance I'll have to pay for them, but I've changed my mind now.
We'll have a kid and then we'll BOTH quit working, and live off the $134K! That's more than we can earn combined (it works out to about $150K CDN). Where do I pick up the first check? It also means that SHE'LL have to support ME if we divorce, since her income as a stay-at-home mother will be $134K US and mine as a worthless stay-at-home dad will be $0! Thank God society and the courts only value men according to their potential to earn money to support women and their brood!
Also, since courts decide custody largely based on whoever spent the most time with the kids, I can be a stay-at-home dad and the primary caregiver, so now I'm guaranteed custody, daddy support and alimony. Excellent! All I have to do is file for divorce after making a false accusation of domestic violence, and my province's "shout at your spouse, lose your house" laws and DV courts will do the rest! I'll have to thank the author of this article for finally coming up with a way to achieve equality under contemporary family law!
Now men can enjoy "cashing out" of their relationships too!
EQUALITY UNDER "FAMILY" LAW AT LAST!
(/Sarcasm)
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
As if the whole dollar-to-78-cents myth weren't bad enough, check