Monday, October 22, 2012

The Widening Gender Gap

In the midst of an intricate analysis of how the gender gap will affect the election outcome, the New York Times’ pollster extraordinaire, Nate Silver remarks:

The large gender gap comes despite the fact that men and women’s economic roles are becoming more equal — according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, women represented 47 percent of the labor force as of September — and that women suffered at least as much as men in the recent economic downturn.

Silver is puzzled to see that at a time when men and women are becoming “more equal” in the economic sense, the gender gap has been getting wider.

Not to worry, James Taranto responded in a tweet. The seeming paradox is not a paradox at all. It is the natural consequence of feminism.

Taranto tweeted:

Prefeminism, the sexes' economic roles were complementary and cooperative. Postfeminism, they are in competition. Hence "gender gaps."

Before feminism men and women cooperated; their “roles” complemented each other.

Feminism was having none of it.

Feminism has turned men and women into economic competitors. It has taught them to give their lives over to “class” struggle. Not merely in the workplace, but also in a home and in their relationships.

Those who, like Silver, believe that feminism is about equality and that equality will produce comity should rethink their views. Feminism has deftly disguised its roots in radical leftist ideology, but the effects it has produced are in perfect harmony with its radicalism.

Taranto has grasped the salient fact that feminism is about undermining cooperation between men and women and turning everyday life into a constant conflict between the sexes. It's class warfare in your personal life. Remember when feminists rallied to the idea: "the personal is political?"

And you were wondering why we all just can’t get along…..


Dennis said...

I would posit that the "Gender Gap" is actually starting to shrink because we are each finding ourselves equally miserable because of Leftist policies with no one to share/aid us that has a personal stake in our happiness. If one takes a wider view one can begin to notice that the women who don't ascribe to the radical feminist meme is growing at a far faster rate than one would assume listening/reading the "media."
These changes take time to demonstrate their presence. As the women in the media and other careers mature they will recognize the damage done by radicalism. One sees it now in much of the conservative "media" which is growing and gaining more credibility each day. A very large percentage of these women are, dare I say, married and recognize the advantages that come from the institution.
The real problem may be convincing men that women as a whole can be trusted. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction whether one wants to recognize it or not. One sees far more examples now of the importance of fathers and the male image. Check out Steven Spielberg's most recent movies.
No matter what seems to be the idea that we do not need each other it always returns to the interdependence, and synergy that interdependence provides, that comes from marriage. Where ever one sees a referendum on marriage between a man and a woman on the ballot it wins. Politics eventually catches up with where the society is actually headed especially if they want to survive. Notice the moves to espouse family values no matter the disingenuous intentions behind it.
Again, I do not think the genders are as far a part as those who wish to control us try to intimate. Why else would one see so much hatred emanating from the Left and its radical base if they were winning the hearts and minds of the country as a whole?

Sam L. said...

Dennis may be right, but we see enough evidence to the contrary to remain highly concerned.

Anonymous said...

As a professional woman in a highly-competitive workforce, I am quite OK with this "equality."
I would not want special treatment in these economic times.
I went to school thinking I would compete on merit, entered the workforce thinking the same, and continue to expect nothing less...
I remember a professor in engineering school almost 25 years ago telling the few of us women that we should not be there, that we should "know our place."
And I was appalled... I didn't enter this field out of competition or feminism or hatred of men... I entered it because I ENJOYED DOING THIS...
I am grateful for the (mostly) welcome I get from men in the workforce, and awed by the hatred from the few that think I should be home, that I "should know my place."

Dennis said...

One has to understand that it is the "squeaky wheel that gets the grease." Over the last hundred years progressives have understood that they cannot take over the US by force or the strength of their ideas. They have gradually taken over the information outlets to control the ideas that are disseminated. It is why much of the education system, news reporting, opinion, judicial, arts, authors, et al have been decidedly Leftist in its orientation.
The idea was that if one can take over what a country sees, hears, learns, or ruled by one can destroy it from within. It has worked fairly well, but there is an underlying ethos that they have not been able to stop or control. Obama has fooled a number of people, but his incompetence is threatening to expose the "game."
Lets face it, if one can get people to see others as the enemy and to keep them from working together then one can utilize only a small amount of people to control them.
The ultimate is to convince men and women that they are not important to each other, they don't need each other to be happy and that each is the natural enemy of the other. It should not surprise anyone that feminism per se is very Leftist in its orientation. One can readily denote that much of its ideas are in many ways anti woman as well as misandric. Why does feminism seem so anti marriage and family?
Step back for a moment and one begins to notice that men and women want many of the same things and most don't hate or dislike each other. What Leftism has done is get us to disrespect our differences and who and what we are as human beings. Hatred is the Left and the rest of us are really pretty decent people. We just have to recognize it in ourselves and not allow others to make us less than we can be.

Anonymous said...

In my experience women in large corporations and government in positions of authority got there by affirmative action and are grossly unqualified, Women at small and medium companies (and entrepreneurs) got there on merit. I treat each accordingly.

Anonymous said...

Anon, I do hope you keep your mind open as you meet each woman in each situation.
As a woman who has worked her way up (via the merit system, nothing less) in some pretty large corporations, bringing some consistently measurable successes that can't be questioned in each step along the way, I certainly hope that men and women treat each other with the respect and open-mind they deserve in the workplace...
I have had to, on several occasions, fight that prejudice and I am quite saddened by it. I understand why affirmative action was put in place. The original intent was to overcome the bigots in the workplace and force people to get the workers of all types in, thereby working next to these bigots and "proving ourselves."
I agree with Stuart, it was likely not the best thought-through plan psychologically. (As with most government interference)
It is a shame that the bigots still exist, the stereotypes of "unworthiness" still exist, and the women, older men, blacks, hispanics, arabs, etc. that WANT to work hard, are COMPETENT, CONFIDENT, and COMFORTABLE, have to fight the stereotypes just as hard as the day the Affirmative Action was put in place, perhaps.
By the way, there are also average white males that want to sit around all day and do nothing, collect their paycheck and go home in 30 years with a pension (enter scenes from "Office Space")

Dennis said...

I was in the military when they decided to make a push to bring in more women. The first to come in were the feminists and as a whole they were loud mouths, lazy, incompetent, oversexed and thought the world owed them a living. Fortunately, after this came a lot of bright intelligent, patriotic young women who really wanted to do their part.
I can remember having a "nice" conversation with a feminist who knew that Fridays were clean up day and came to work in a skirt. I asked her to make sure she cleaned the dust from the light fixture above the Commander's desk She responded that I only wanted to look up her skirt. I responded that we could bring in a female NCO on Saturday and then she could clean it. Amazing how quickly she did what I asked. One cannot imagine how hard it was to get a feminist to actually do the work.
As I stated those women who came later were something the country could be proud. Feminists NO, Women YES.
One of the reasons I am so oriented towards individualism is that years of life have taught me that stereotypes just have no value. Some of the best people I have worked with have been minorities and have also been my mentors. That said, Affirmative Action did and still does far more harm than the supposed good attributed to it. Generally it did nothing to aid the disadvantaged, created animosity and went to those who had the financial wherewithal to do it on their own.
Bigotry will exist as long as there are groups such as feminists, NAACP, La Rasa, et al. They are by definition group oriented and are bigoted and built on stereotypes of others.

Dennis said...

To demonstrate the bigotry of feminism. If I gave you the three largest cancer related deaths, lung, prostate, and breast cancer, which order would you say they rank in the number of deaths per 100,000? The answer is: lung, prostate and then breast cancer.
One could be lead to believe that the difference between men and women could be determined by how much they care about the other as well as themselves. One sees all kinds of men's events, actors, sports figures, et al advertising in a number of ways to donate money, time and effort to fight breast cancer. Name the women of any note who have spent their time on trying to do the same for prostate cancer? What is the color of the ribbon that denotes prostate cancer? Having a hard time. I know I am.
Just a little thought about who actually thinks of more than themselves. One of the things I notice is when one reads a female commenter it is almost always about themselves.

Anonymous said...

Dennis - one answer to your question: Erin Andrews.
Another answer to another one of your questions: Because women may tend to write about our personal experience in order to make it "real."
I am sorry that you interpret Breast Cancer Awareness as bigotry.
Perhaps instead you could see it as something that is one of the most symbolic of cancer awareness.
One that is the most easy to spot, the most easy to recognize... Women lose a breast or two, lost their hair.
I can't imagine it was bigots that brought about this grand cause to be such a hugely "pink" awareness.
But the great love one sister had for another in 1991. Susan G. Komen was a Firecracker. Many many men lost their mothers and wives to breast cancer, or had scares of their lives. And you dare call women who want to fight this BIGOTS??? Men want to fight it too...
Lance Armstrong brought great awareness, and most recognize his yellow bands...
There are advertisements on TV ALLLL the time fighting lung cancer, making sure people don't smoke (Likely the number one cause of lung cancer)
WE DON'T KNOW what causes breast cancer!! Hence all the efforts to research.
Your indication that this somehow makes us bigots is the most raw and single-handed insult I could imagine...
I am in complete awe after reading your comments...

Dennis said...


Nice rhetoric, but did not address what I said or actually represent what I stated. Again, name the women who spend the time and effort to address prostrate cancer in the manner that men address breast cancer. To fail to recognize, and thus take all recognition of other cancers, is intolerant. Your response is an example. It demonstrate little concern for others. That you cannot see past self.
Do you really believe that men do not face challenges. Say the growing numbers of young men who are being preyed upon by women or the term "boy toy."
Lets take the Vietnam Veteran, who got drafted, who came back from SEA duty to be called a "baby killer" by larger numbers of people. Who was depicted as the bad guy in many movies of the time. Who could not get a job because he was disabled or was considered "low hanging fruit" by a thankful nation. Who was treated as if he did not exist.
I could continue, but I suspect that someone so total involved in self would never consider the problems of others. Only women deal with adversity.
Again nice reading.

Dennis said...

I think what bothers me the most is the utter selfishness of today's feminism and feminist. Nothing or no one exists in the "Its all about me," "life is so hard for poor little princess" world and it is every body's else's responsibility to provide for my needs.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Dennis, your changing of the subject, ignorance of the very answers I gave you is amazing.
Men prey on women EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Women prey on men too.
WHERE, oh WHERE did you get the impression that I said Women address prostate cancer in the same manner that men address breast cancer?
I gave you reasons that Men JUST MIGHT ADDRESS BREAST CANCER.
I am sorry (mostly for you) that you do not understand this.
NOWHERE in ANY string have I said that WOMEN were unique in facing the challenge of cancer... Or that Breast Cancer is more important to study than others. I said it MAY be more symbolic... But you seemed to have read past it, unfortunately...
I can't imagine anyone at Susan G. Komen saying "Let's find ways to get money for ourselves, and not leave a penny for the Prostate folks!!"
Yes, the pink ribbon caught on like wildfire.
ps, according to, it is estimated in 2012 that in the US:
About 39,510 women will die from breast cancer
About 28,170 men will die of prostate cancer.
Lung Cancer is indeed the leading cause, but as I have aluded to, about 80% of lung cancer deaths are caused directly by smoking, and many others are caused by exposure to secondhand smoke.
So, we can add a white band to our arms if we like in honor of those we lost, and to fight for the loved ones who are still fighting.
I personally hate cancers of all sort, and don't wish cancer of any type upon anyone.
But to think that, because a cause happened to catch on enough by people who loved their mothers and wives (and even husbands, because, YES, MEN GET breast cancer), is bigoted, is simply beyond comprehension.
Praying for ALL the cancer survivors out there, for one more day if that is what you are meant to have, or for a peaceful, graceful ending when your time is due.
And for a CURE for any cancer possible AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

If you are describing yourself as the bad guy coming from Vietnam, I am sorry for the treatment by the men and women of the US when you returned.