skills-matched cohorts of male and female employees show a wage and career security discrepancy in favour of men in almost any study you care to mention
You mean an hours-worked discrepancy. Men put in the majority of overtime hours, and the vast majority of 60+ hour work weeks. The "76 cents on the dollar" canard is based on ignoring overtime and focusing on "skills" and "positions". If you're a woman, and you worked 10 hours more per week than a male colleague in the same position, you'd damn well expect to be paid more money as well.
but it conspicuously never flips around the other side
Another one gone Another one gone Another meme bites the dust
In 2008, single, childless women between ages 22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts in most U.S. cities, with incomes that were 8% greater on average, according to an analysis of Census Bureau data released Wednesday by Reach Advisors, a consumer-research firm in Slingerlands, N.Y.
"Oh it's so unfair, that women don't have to register for the draft, in spite of the fact that volunteer female soldiers have been fighting for decades to even have the chance at front-line combat duties"
You realize you're swapping choice for responsibility, right? Lots of men chose to volunteer for the military before they were drafted, does that mean that millions weren't drafted into service?
There's a difference between men who believe in men's rights, and the Men's Rights Movement. Unfortunately it's the latter who are allowed to control the issues.
And then there's the SJW's who troll the shit out of MRA's for shits and giggles. Ask anyone who calls themselves an MRA and they'll tell you that fairness in custody and divorce court are in his top three issues.
No, you're doing it all wrong. What you need to do with facts that disagree with State Department propaganda is to lazily label them as conspriacy theories and call it a day.
No matter what the West does or does not do someone somewhere will find a way to blame us.
How is it not the fault of the West?
The people of the Middle East didn't ask Great Britain to bring it's imperialistic dick and draw up a dozen countries out of nothing after WWII, nor install monarchs to sell oil cheaply to British Petroleum while the citizens were left to fend for themselves.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask for the Palestinians to pay the price for Nazi war crimes by seizing land for the benefit of immigrants from Europe.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask England and America to violently overthrow the democracy of Iran after it dared lay claim to the benefits of oil production, and installed the brutal Shah who ruled for decades.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask the CIA to put their stooge, Saddam Hussein, in power in Iraq, nor launch an invasion of Iran.
The people of the Middle East ask for American support for every brutal dictator in the region, whether it be Egypt or Iraq or Iran or Saudi Arabia.
Hint: There were no drone attacks in Syria nor US support for the rebels when Assad's own people tried to rebel against him and he proceeded to gas them
Hint: there is no civil war in Syria, and Assad never ordered gas attacks.
Guns and fighters and money come from Assad's enemies, not Syria. And who is stupid enough to believe that Assad would order gas attacks the day weapon inspectors arrived in the country? Or why he would suddenly use them when his military was making gains against the opposition, instead of the year before when the Syrian government was losing ground?
This is as asinine as whining about what a mess indian and black communities were in 1900, and whining some more when someone mentions slavery or the Trail of Tears.
Dressing up the end of the overt occupation of Iraq and reducing the occupation of Afghanistan as a cut for the benefit of the rubes does NOT make it one. The United States is still spending more than the rest of the planet combined and that's going to change any time soon.
severely
You're using that word, severely....
Then the United States wouldn't be trying it's hardest to renew a cold war with Russia at the same time it's continuing it's half dozen dirty wars throughout the ME east at the same time it's ramping up AFRICOM at the same time it's preparing for the third war on Iraq.
quit funding NATO
Then the Pentagon would lose the deflection that NATO provides. Libya isn't a war, it's a limited NATO operation with no boots on the ground!
ends up being the US warmongering the world
FTFY. Who's going to protect the world from the U.S.?
Its about time the US stopped paying for the defense of Europe, and let them pay their own way for that.
LOLz. You think the European share of of the Pentagon's ~1000 military bases around the world has anything to do with "defense"?
Far more than just Free Syria. The United States has spent years arming 'radical muslims' to fight Assad, and now wants to attack these armed radicals. You wouldn't think Americans would be so eager to get punked by the USG a second time after the invasion of Iraq, but two beheading videos is all it takes.
"The 9 page, extensive report has since been vindicated many times over with revelations of US, NATO, and Persian Gulf complicity in raising armies of extremists within Libya and along Syria's borders. ISIS itself, which is claimed to occupy a region stretching from northeastern Syria and across northern and western Iraq, has operated all along Turkey's border with Syria, "coincidentally" where the US CIA has conducted years of "monitoring" and arming of "moderate" groups.
In fact, the US admits it has armed, funded, and equipped "moderates" to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. In a March 2013 Telegraph article titled, "US and Europe in âmajor airlift of arms to Syrian rebels through Zagreb'," it was reported that a single program included 3,000 tons of weapons sent in 75 planeloads paid for by Saudi Arabia at the bidding of the United States. The New York Times in its article, "Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With C.I.A. Aid," admits that the CIA assisted Arab governments and Turkey with military aid to terrorists fighting in Syria constituting hundreds of airlifts landing in both Jordan and Turkey."
"But in the years they were getting started, a key component of ISISâ(TM)s support came from wealthy individuals in the Arab Gulf States of Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Sometimes the support came with the tacit nod of approval from those regimes; often, it took advantage of poor money laundering protections in those states, according to officials, experts, and leaders of the Syrian opposition, which is fighting ISIS as well as the regime."
At what point do Middle-Eastern people begin to take some responsibility for their own problems?
I see the answer to my question is "not any time soon". The people in the Middle East would like nothing more than to be left alone, but western powers have been actively fucking with them for over a hundred years.
How, exactly, is your average shmoe living in Yemen or Saudi Arabia supposed to "take responsibility" in the face of drone attacks and western support for brutal dictatorships?
Fractions of a penny on the pork barrel dollar. Slash military spending to a reasonable size - down to the National/Coast/Air Guards - and you'd have far more money to spend on infrastructure and R&D. We could have gone to Mars long ago if NASA's budget was a trillion dollars per year.
You do know that almost all the people fighting ISIS are Muslims themselves, right?
This. FINALLY someone points out that these people are doing this because of what they BELIEVE. People are always talking about how these people are psychopaths and they just want power...and no one seems to want to point out that these people believe a book that TELLS THEM TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
Wow. It's like America went through the Iraq invasion and decided the lesson to be learned was: suck down USG propaganda by the supertanker and be ready to demand the blood of Muslims on a moment's notice.
ISIS doesn't exist because of the Koran. ISIS exists because the U.S. and the Saudis have been busy funding and training and arming the very 'radical muslims' you are complaining about, to fight Assad in Syria. And because of a backlash to the sectarian, corrupt and violent government headed by al-Maliki.
Now, before some mouth breather starts up with the "you question the storyline? you must support the terrahrists" bullshit, the point here isn't that ISIS are nice people. The point is that if you want to complain about the armed fundamentalist muslims, start at the U.S. State Department, and stop pretending all their motivations are based on religion.
Either there is a not-so-small extremist element in Islam, or a silent majority who refuses to do anything about it.
First, the same sort of idiots were making this same idiot claim after the 911 attacks. Just because you can't be bothered to read about denuciations of terrorism doesn't mean that they didn't happen.
Second, you do know that the only reason ISIS exists is because Assad's enemies - chiefly the United States and Saudi Arabia - have been funding and arming the very "radicals" you are now complaining about?
Third, name one instance of "radical Islam" that isn't directly financed by western imperialists (Syria) or is a backlash to western imperialism (Iranians overthrowing the western-backed Shah).
'Humanitarian war' is a contradiction in terms. And, of course, there would be no ISIS or a war in Syria if it wasn't created, armed and funded by the CIA and Saudi Arabia. So when do the airstrikes start on Langley?
So when are you signing up to invade Saudi Arabia? They, along with the CIA, created ISIS in the first place to fight Assad. Saudi Arabia, where they chopped the heads of 8 people last month.
Dur wut? Obama is the one who caused this by creating, funding and arming ISIS in the first place. There would have been no war in Syria for the last 3 years if the United States and it's pals Qatar and Saudi Arabia weren't sending a steady supply of guns and fighters. The Saudi Arabia that chopped off the heads of at least 8 people last month.
Imperialist Russia fell 30 years before nuclear weapons were first used, and longer than that before the start of the Cold War. Unless you are referring to the USSR?
Willfully stupid? The equal and opposite response would be blatantly trolling Android users. Pointing out that the Emperor does not have clothes does not mean one has an opposing sort of delusion.....Tone Troll.
Even more pointless blathering. Cutting out the hand waving and responding to parts where you get within a few miles of having a point.
But you were too obtuse to grasp that sometimes words are used in name only. In the eurozone case independent doesn't mean independent monetary policy.
Are you submitting your name to the Nobel Prize Committee for discovering that water is wet? That the leaders if the Scottish Independence movement wanted to stick with the pound is not only not news, people were pointing out the potential problems of doing so before the vote.
And no practical exit from it either. In the military case, well, NATO members don't have much independence in terms of military spending, choices of systems - and in particular - when it comes to defending another member.
Who was sitting of the coast of Scotland ready to invade if the country did not join NATO or sign some sort of defense treaty with Britain? Scotland needs military protection as much as they need Tiger Stones.
Willfully obtuse. Gotcha. Unless you're going to sit there and pretend that that someone claiming the latest Galaxy was full of "gimmicks and add-ons that attempt to achieve parity with iPhone" was "good honest neutral folk" and not an Apple Fanboy?
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed - they make more money than their male colleagues.
You mean an hours-worked discrepancy. Men put in the majority of overtime hours, and the vast majority of 60+ hour work weeks. The "76 cents on the dollar" canard is based on ignoring overtime and focusing on "skills" and "positions". If you're a woman, and you worked 10 hours more per week than a male colleague in the same position, you'd damn well expect to be paid more money as well.
Another one gone
Another one gone
Another meme bites the dust
You realize you're swapping choice for responsibility, right? Lots of men chose to volunteer for the military before they were drafted, does that mean that millions weren't drafted into service?
And then there's the SJW's who troll the shit out of MRA's for shits and giggles. Ask anyone who calls themselves an MRA and they'll tell you that fairness in custody and divorce court are in his top three issues.
No, you're doing it all wrong. What you need to do with facts that disagree with State Department propaganda is to lazily label them as conspriacy theories and call it a day.
How is it not the fault of the West?
The people of the Middle East didn't ask Great Britain to bring it's imperialistic dick and draw up a dozen countries out of nothing after WWII, nor install monarchs to sell oil cheaply to British Petroleum while the citizens were left to fend for themselves.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask for the Palestinians to pay the price for Nazi war crimes by seizing land for the benefit of immigrants from Europe.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask England and America to violently overthrow the democracy of Iran after it dared lay claim to the benefits of oil production, and installed the brutal Shah who ruled for decades.
The people of the Middle East didn't ask the CIA to put their stooge, Saddam Hussein, in power in Iraq, nor launch an invasion of Iran.
The people of the Middle East ask for American support for every brutal dictator in the region, whether it be Egypt or Iraq or Iran or Saudi Arabia.
Hint: there is no civil war in Syria, and Assad never ordered gas attacks.
Guns and fighters and money come from Assad's enemies, not Syria. And who is stupid enough to believe that Assad would order gas attacks the day weapon inspectors arrived in the country? Or why he would suddenly use them when his military was making gains against the opposition, instead of the year before when the Syrian government was losing ground?
This is as asinine as whining about what a mess indian and black communities were in 1900, and whining some more when someone mentions slavery or the Trail of Tears.
Dressing up the end of the overt occupation of Iraq and reducing the occupation of Afghanistan as a cut for the benefit of the rubes does NOT make it one. The United States is still spending more than the rest of the planet combined and that's going to change any time soon.
You're using that word, severely....
Then the United States wouldn't be trying it's hardest to renew a cold war with Russia at the same time it's continuing it's half dozen dirty wars throughout the ME east at the same time it's ramping up AFRICOM at the same time it's preparing for the third war on Iraq.
Then the Pentagon would lose the deflection that NATO provides. Libya isn't a war, it's a limited NATO operation with no boots on the ground!
FTFY. Who's going to protect the world from the U.S.?
LOLz. You think the European share of of the Pentagon's ~1000 military bases around the world has anything to do with "defense"?
Far more than just Free Syria. The United States has spent years arming 'radical muslims' to fight Assad, and now wants to attack these armed radicals. You wouldn't think Americans would be so eager to get punked by the USG a second time after the invasion of Iraq, but two beheading videos is all it takes.
Sure thing:
In fact, the US admits it has armed, funded, and equipped "moderates" to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. In a March 2013 Telegraph article titled, "US and Europe in âmajor airlift of arms to Syrian rebels through Zagreb'," it was reported that a single program included 3,000 tons of weapons sent in 75 planeloads paid for by Saudi Arabia at the bidding of the United States. The New York Times in its article, "Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With C.I.A. Aid," admits that the CIA assisted Arab governments and Turkey with military aid to terrorists fighting in Syria constituting hundreds of airlifts landing in both Jordan and Turkey."
And for our "allies"
I see the answer to my question is "not any time soon". The people in the Middle East would like nothing more than to be left alone, but western powers have been actively fucking with them for over a hundred years.
How, exactly, is your average shmoe living in Yemen or Saudi Arabia supposed to "take responsibility" in the face of drone attacks and western support for brutal dictatorships?
Any excuse to dismiss the entire post so you don't have try and make an actual response to any of the actual points.
Fractions of a penny on the pork barrel dollar. Slash military spending to a reasonable size - down to the National/Coast/Air Guards - and you'd have far more money to spend on infrastructure and R&D. We could have gone to Mars long ago if NASA's budget was a trillion dollars per year.
You do know that almost all the people fighting ISIS are Muslims themselves, right?
Wow. It's like America went through the Iraq invasion and decided the lesson to be learned was: suck down USG propaganda by the supertanker and be ready to demand the blood of Muslims on a moment's notice.
ISIS doesn't exist because of the Koran. ISIS exists because the U.S. and the Saudis have been busy funding and training and arming the very 'radical muslims' you are complaining about, to fight Assad in Syria. And because of a backlash to the sectarian, corrupt and violent government headed by al-Maliki.
Now, before some mouth breather starts up with the "you question the storyline? you must support the terrahrists" bullshit, the point here isn't that ISIS are nice people. The point is that if you want to complain about the armed fundamentalist muslims, start at the U.S. State Department, and stop pretending all their motivations are based on religion.
First, the same sort of idiots were making this same idiot claim after the 911 attacks. Just because you can't be bothered to read about denuciations of terrorism doesn't mean that they didn't happen.
Second, you do know that the only reason ISIS exists is because Assad's enemies - chiefly the United States and Saudi Arabia - have been funding and arming the very "radicals" you are now complaining about?
Third, name one instance of "radical Islam" that isn't directly financed by western imperialists (Syria) or is a backlash to western imperialism (Iranians overthrowing the western-backed Shah).
So you want to hit Langley, Virginia?
'Humanitarian war' is a contradiction in terms. And, of course, there would be no ISIS or a war in Syria if it wasn't created, armed and funded by the CIA and Saudi Arabia. So when do the airstrikes start on Langley?
So when are you signing up to invade Saudi Arabia? They, along with the CIA, created ISIS in the first place to fight Assad. Saudi Arabia, where they chopped the heads of 8 people last month.
That's convenient.
Step 1: Create an uncivil war with foreign fighters and money, trained and armed by the CIA and Saudi Arabia.
Step 2: Declare areas to be "lawless" due to the war you created, and use that as a reason to make more war with bombs.
Brilliant!
Dur wut? Obama is the one who caused this by creating, funding and arming ISIS in the first place. There would have been no war in Syria for the last 3 years if the United States and it's pals Qatar and Saudi Arabia weren't sending a steady supply of guns and fighters. The Saudi Arabia that chopped off the heads of at least 8 people last month.
More like: iPhone is a product, as Galaxy is a product.
Most Android phone sales would also be going to owners of existing Android phones, so WYP?
Imperialist Russia fell 30 years before nuclear weapons were first used, and longer than that before the start of the Cold War. Unless you are referring to the USSR?
Willfully stupid? The equal and opposite response would be blatantly trolling Android users. Pointing out that the Emperor does not have clothes does not mean one has an opposing sort of delusion.....Tone Troll.
Even more pointless blathering. Cutting out the hand waving and responding to parts where you get within a few miles of having a point.
Are you submitting your name to the Nobel Prize Committee for discovering that water is wet? That the leaders if the Scottish Independence movement wanted to stick with the pound is not only not news, people were pointing out the potential problems of doing so before the vote.
Who was sitting of the coast of Scotland ready to invade if the country did not join NATO or sign some sort of defense treaty with Britain? Scotland needs military protection as much as they need Tiger Stones.
Willfully obtuse. Gotcha. Unless you're going to sit there and pretend that that someone claiming the latest Galaxy was full of "gimmicks and add-ons that attempt to achieve parity with iPhone" was "good honest neutral folk" and not an Apple Fanboy?
Didn't think so.