Most of the actual real numbers aren't available anywhere because they're not counted.
Census and similar studies are backed up by governments, WHICH support the patriarchy.
Myth 1. Suuuureee. Women are only 50% of the population total. Remember this is a WORLD WIDE statistic, and therefore not true of first world countries. Or countries who are, yes sexist, like china who do not have as many women. However if we look at America, more women are buying homes then men. So while this statistic is a little true, it does not apply to FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS. You need to fight sexism, against other countries and get this down. Stop trying to focus only on first world places, fight against cultural norms which are not beneficial to equality.
Myth 2. What kind of sexual slavery? This kind? Cause there are a lot of different studies. For various things, you need to clarify what KIND of slavery. Prostitution is a grey area of this whole thing, and the numbers would be more factual including this, but it would need to be clarified what sexual slavery. Do they mean only the human traffic kind? Or all kinds?
So this is true, with actual prostitution, but probably not American girls being kidnapped and being sold into slavery.
Myth 3. The statistics are hard to pull up, because many account for the 'unreported' statistics, like the 1 in... four, or so women will be raped myth. That's the statistic for world wide, plus minused further for the unreported crimes. Yeah. Its hard to find At least most statistics at least say, yeah men do get abused, but don't go much further then that. I think this video is pretty telling why there are few statistics of abuse suffered by men. Yes smile as a man is being hit! YAY! stare
Yes and no. If I have to say "i am an equalist" instead of a feminist to avoid the stigma of the rapid man haters, then there is a problem. I think that some know they are lying and others don't because they just don't think about it.
Quote:
*If so, is it justifiable?
Yes and no, in cases where it actually helps people to realize things, then yeah, lie a little. If it is just going in and causing people to panic, to react as the people wishes it, then no. A little lie to help someone get better, is okay. But a lie to get people to act and follow what you want them to do, is wrong. You should always advocate skeptical thinking, not just following the leader blindly.
Quote:
*If not, what can be done to reprimand people that use false tactics?
Call them out on it, if they can not reply, or resort to the be all end all 'patriarchy' stuff, you won.
Quote:
*Should the Feminist movement do a better job of policing themselves?
Yes. As someone else has said, not in relation to feminism but still can apply "if you truly think you are different then the rest, if you don't like them, SET YOURSELF APART FROM THEM."
Quote:
*Are feminists using these tactics because they are running out of legitimate problems?
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
I'm surprised there are people who still believe in the 77% pay gap thing.
In fact the reality behind the 77 cent per man's dollar statistic is that it doesn't even have a source. The original source of that claim is from the BLS, but if you just look at how the BLS calculated the wage gap, what you find is they are comparing the aggregate female median pay to the aggregate male median pay.
Meaning they calculate it by taking females salaries and finding the median, and then comparing it to the male median.
That doesn't control for anything, and yet it's constantly said to be "for the same work" which was never even said in the original BLS source from which this statistic comes from because it doesn't make any mathematical sense.
You don't have to read any debunked sources to learn this, you just have to look at the original BLS source to learn this (and to be mathematically competent enough to know what a median is......).
I'm surprised there are people who still believe in the 77% pay gap thing.
In fact the reality behind the 77 cent per man's dollar statistic is that it doesn't even have a source. The original source of that claim is from the BLS, but if you just look at how the BLS calculated the wage gap, what you find is they are comparing the aggregate female median pay to the aggregate male median pay.
Meaning they calculate it by taking females salaries and finding the median, and then comparing it to the male median.
That doesn't control for anything, and yet it's constantly said to be "for the same work" which was never even said in the original BLS source from which this statistic comes from because it doesn't make any mathematical sense.
You don't have to read any debunked sources to learn this, you just have to look at the original BLS source to learn this (and to be mathematically competent enough to know what a median is......).
It does have a source. It's a pretty well-regarded source too, what with being a government institution and all.
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
Yeah I've noticed this as well in the ED.
In all fairness, ihatefeminists.com is probably not a valid source of information regarding feminism. It is perfectly fine to criticize sources of information. Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour.
Most of the actual real numbers aren't available anywhere because they're not counted.
Census and similar studies are backed up by governments, WHICH support the patriarchy.
This.
Plus a few of these, like those about rape statistics, say they "may not" be true because they only do a few four year universities. But many of these also "may not" be true if you account for women who are raped and never tell anyone because of shame and self-blame. Some of these aren't exactly easy to track and report, and half of the women who experience much of this will never come forward.
While that doesn't excuse misrepresenting facts purposely, I am simply proposing that it's almost impossible to get a hundred percent accurate numbers on these.
Most of the actual real numbers aren't available anywhere because they're not counted.
Census and similar studies are backed up by governments, WHICH support the patriarchy.
This.
Plus a few of these, like those about rape statistics, say they "may not" be true because they only do a few four year universities. But many of these also "may not" be true if you account for women who are raped and never tell anyone because of shame and self-blame. Some of these aren't exactly easy to track and report, and half of the women who experience much of this will never come forward.
While that doesn't excuse misrepresenting facts purposely, I am simply proposing that it's almost impossible to get a hundred percent accurate numbers on these.
It's impossible to have any sort of 100% real numbers on any census or statistics, and when it comes to domestic violence and rape, it's a fact, because I've known a lot of rape victims, and none of them came forward to the justice system. I myself was a victim of an abusive relationship, I'm not in any census.
This guy is trying to blame feminists on showing false numbers as facts, when it's usually more just the materialist state feminist that even use the census studies as argument, and he's completely going over the fact that practically all government census and studies are also non factual numbers and mostly lies.
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
Yeah I've noticed this as well in the ED.
In all fairness, ihatefeminists.com is probably not a valid source of information regarding feminism. It is perfectly fine to criticize sources of information. Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour.
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
Yeah I've noticed this as well in the ED.
In all fairness, ihatefeminists.com is probably not a valid source of information regarding feminism. It is perfectly fine to criticize sources of information. Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour.
Hmmm i couldn't find that website.
I made it up, dipshit. It is however pretty much equivalent to all the sources used by you clowns.
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
Yeah I've noticed this as well in the ED.
In all fairness, ihatefeminists.com is probably not a valid source of information regarding feminism. It is perfectly fine to criticize sources of information. Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour.
Hmmm i couldn't find that website.
I made it up, dipshit. It is however pretty much equivalent to all the sources used by you clowns.
I knew you made it up, that was the point.
thanks for taking the time to check all the sources though, and not just making frivolous attacks.
1. Find an argument you dislike
2. Demand citations, provide no counterargument
3. Whine about burden of proof, still provide no counterargument
4. When a citation is provided question it cynically, but provide no counterargument
5. Leave the thread without ever addressing the central point, search board for other threads with opinions you don't like
5. Repeat
Yeah I've noticed this as well in the ED.
In all fairness, ihatefeminists.com is probably not a valid source of information regarding feminism. It is perfectly fine to criticize sources of information. Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour.
Ha yes I agree that that source is not good (but did that source link to other sources that were legitimate?)
However there is a trend in the ED where people tend to criticize people's source no matter where it comes from.
Like with almost everything, there's a balancing point and going too far one way or the other is not a good thing.
You made that source up................wow really? That doesn't help support your point that the people in here used bad sources. Why don't you just point out the actual sources they use and explain what's wrong with them?
"Any 1000 level university course will require your sources to at least fulfil some basic idea of academic rigour."
I agree, but they also require you to make some sort of argument that actually has an ounce of legitimacy in it. Creating a pretend source and then just saying "well the sources in here were like that source" is not a credible argument because you're not actually demonstrating why the actual sources used are as bad as that pretend source.
The point being, if the sources they used are bad it shouldn't be any problem to actually point out the real sources the used and pointing out why they are bad. You shouldn't need to rely on making up a source and using an argument from analogy.
I'm surprised there are people who still believe in the 77% pay gap thing.
In fact the reality behind the 77 cent per man's dollar statistic is that it doesn't even have a source. The original source of that claim is from the BLS, but if you just look at how the BLS calculated the wage gap, what you find is they are comparing the aggregate female median pay to the aggregate male median pay.
Meaning they calculate it by taking females salaries and finding the median, and then comparing it to the male median.
That doesn't control for anything, and yet it's constantly said to be "for the same work" which was never even said in the original BLS source from which this statistic comes from because it doesn't make any mathematical sense.
You don't have to read any debunked sources to learn this, you just have to look at the original BLS source to learn this (and to be mathematically competent enough to know what a median is......).
It does have a source. It's a pretty well-regarded source too, what with being a government institution and all.
You did not read what I said.
The claim that "Women make 77 cents for a man's dollar for the same work" does not have a source, because the original BLS source does not say this. The original BLS source says that the aggregate median pay of women is 77 cents relative to the aggregate median pay of the male dollar. The BLS statistic is based upon an aggregate calculation of the income of males and females, it does not control for any variables. So to say "for the same work" is to not understand how they calculated it.
The two claims are fundamentally different, yet the correct interpretation of the statistic is rarely used. The incorrect one "for the same work" is the one most commonly said even though it's false.
200
150
200
300
150
200
200
150
