Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 51
view profile
History
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positionsPage 3 of 5    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

nothing but discrimination against white men

Hmmm ... hard to believe when one looks around --
Who holds the majority of high-paying, high-prestige, and well-paid jobs ... why, lo and behold, it's white men!
Even after 50 years of attempting to change the status quo, the above is still true.
It's just not as true as it used to be, which, translated, means there are women in some of those positions and, much to some American's dismay, a Black man leading the country!

I seriously do not see how a group of people who demonstrably hold the highest positions in the society can be discriminated against. It's like the Queen of England complaining because, dammit, not everybody is bowing down to her.


Two of my professors told me, in candid moments, how the administrators of the school pressured the faculty to prefer applicants who were neither white nor male.


Where these professors white and male, by chance?


Women are now a solid majority of graduate students generally.

Let me reply with the type of responses given when its pointed out to (some) men that women are discriminated against in the workplace:
1. The men aren't actually applying to graduate school, so of course there are more women there.
2. Of the men that do apply, a lot of them are so busy partying that they don't study and drop out in the first year or two.


Luckily, the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have been drawning the line on the most blatant forms of "reverse" discrimination.

I've seen some of your statements before turn out to be ... inaccurate. Could you post a link or source?


It's not surprising that so many people who resent white men

Well, that wouldn't be me. I like white men and I believe the vast majority of white men are decently motivated and have no desire or intention of 'oppressing' women or anyone. They are, however, just as stuck in this system as are women and minorities.


are statist authoritarians who also resent the United States--which was founded by white, capitalist, English-speaking, Protestant men--and all it stands for.

Yes, well ... I believe those are the white, capitalist, English-speaking men who denied women legal personhood, and felt fully justified in declaring an entire ethnic group subhuman. At that time, "freedom for all" really meant, "freedom for white, capitalist, English speaking men, like us". Fortunately, some men with integrity and some brave women have managed to modify that definition of freedom to be more inclusive.

who cooked up the doctrine of "political correctness" expressly to suppress opinions that deviated from the party line.

I'll bet you think you aren't following a party line, right? You imagine yourself some last bastion defender of free speech and the American way? Well, I see your 'party line' a lot - sometimes lifted word for word from anti-feminist rant sites. Fortunately, such extremism isn't the majority of men, and since America is a democracy the majority will (eventually) sway and equality for men, women and ethnic groups will become the norm. Well, as long as global warming doesn't limit our existence ....

to suppress opinions

Yet, here you are - expressing your opinion! And I see similar opinions expressed all over the place - so I guess the Liberal PC's dastardly plan just isn't working! "Curses, foiled again" we say.

Their followers, who popularized this un-American, anti-democratic stratagem in the U.S., calculatedly made it easier for the gullible to swallow by sugar-coating it as being all about being sensitivity and consideration.

So, offering respect to everyone is "un-American" and "anti-democratic"? I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.

The notions of "multiculturalism" and "diversity" are closely related to political correctness and, beneath their veneer of sweetness and light, have the same anti-democratic aim.

You object to mulitculturalism and diversity? You really are a man out of time, aren't you? To imagine that democracy is threatened by diversity of peoples is a remarkable twist of logic; democracy is about the majority deciding society's direction - and the majority can be any color or creed. I should think inclusivity would be a hallmark of democracy, not considered an attack.

That's why leftist true believers--who are the leading lights of feminism--like them so well. We saw one of them, the dopey Sandra Fluke, on stage at the Democratic Convention, telling us we should pay for her contraceptives.

I didn't know what that was about, so I looked it up. Interesting, in the context of free speech, that the Republicans refused to listen to her talk about contraception, but preferred to stick to an all-male (white?) panel. Nonetheless, their quasi-spokesperson, Rush Limbaugh, then felt qualified to call her a slut and make other slurs. Hmmm ... what were you saying above about trying to shut people up?

In any case, she was apparently making the case for contraceptives being included in health care plans administered by religious organizations - she didn't actually mean *her* contraceptives. Basically, due to religious reasons, some organizations exclude contraceptives from coverage (and I assume that includes condoms and spermicides) because they figure people who need contraceptives are immoral (freedom, wherefor art thou?). Given that her goal was to have Georgetown university offer contraception as part of their health care program, I fail to see how you would be paying for her contraception.

Anyway, what's a few dollars for contraception, if the alternative is unwanted babies, or even a reduction in abortions? Although, the supposed bastion of free speech and freedom probably figures they have the right to control the nation's sexual behavior.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 52
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 3:03:37 PM
C 4’s…I told you it would get interesting…

I can just hear the calls back and forth to/from the cellar (not the glass cellar)…mom…when’s the meatloaf gonna be ready…son time to wash your hands…


the United States--which was founded by white, capitalist, English-speaking, Protestant men--and all it stands for.




However, this notion of equality in the United States at the beginning of the twenty-first century is not the same as when America was very young. Although the 1776 Declaration of Independence proclaimed that "all Men are created equal" with certain basic rights including "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness," the goal of liberty from England was stronger than striving for equality among the colonists. As a result, some classes of people enjoyed more rights than others. For example, in the first years of the nation only white male adult citizens who owned property could vote. Excluded were women, people of color, and the poor who held no property to speak of. Slavery was recognized as an important part of the nation's economy. In fact, nowhere did the term equality appear in the U.S. Constitution adopted in 1789 or the Bill of Rights of 1791.
http://www.enotes.com/civil-rights-equal-protection-reference/civil-rights-equal-protection



So, the notion of gender equality was truly a non-existent thought at the founding of this wonderful nation.

And I wonder??? What were the religious beliefs of Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin…perhaps the most influential of the signers of the constitution???? Could it be deist and Unitarian???


Two of my professors told me, in candid moments, how the administrators of the school pressured the faculty to prefer applicants who were neither white nor male. Women are now a solid majority of graduate students generally.


A clear sign of reverse discrimination and the effects of Affirmative Action…or is it something else??? Like many women prefer to continue their education to the graduate degree and beyond????


It's not surprising that so many people who resent white men are statist authoritarians who also resent the United States


Funny that…I’ve yet to see one liberal democrat (yanno…those ppl whom you’re alluding to) petition to secede or make a call to arms for the purpose of insurrection…unlike those other traitorous bystards did so recently after this past election….we democrats love our nation…what the majority of this country doesn’t like is the far reich doctrine intruding into our personal lives…


"political correctness"


Oh my….let’s just bring you up to modern times on the meaning of “Politically Correct”…shall we:



Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT


: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated



I wear my badge of “Political Correctness” like a badge of honor!


It is not. It is about silencing anyone who dares disagree with the tenets of the secular quasi-religion of leftism. The notions of "multiculturalism" and "diversity" are closely related to political correctness and, beneath their veneer of sweetness and light, have the same anti-democratic aim. That's why leftist true believers--who are the leading lights of feminism--like them so well. We saw one of them, the dopey Sandra Fluke, on stage at the Democratic Convention, telling us we should pay for her contraceptives.


Ahhhh…there it is…A democrat is by extension a liberal-who by extension is a leftist-who by extension is a socialist-who by extension is a communist…therefore, by the reasoning of the extreme reich wing…a democrat=a communist…what a crock of bullshyte….unless of course we can then call the modern republican party fascists (which someresemble so well)


You belittle the other girl, saying that she moved to an area 'desperate for workers",


I missed the part where 4’s belittled the other girl…want to point it out?


Then you go on to presume that this scenario represents all jobs in all fields in America.


Actually, it’s your presumption…he just told a true life story and said that it is reflective of what happens out there in the real world in male dominated jobs.…it which you continually ignore that 60% of the girls went unemployed while 100% of the boys got employment.
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 53
view profile
History
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 3:11:36 PM

There were 5 girls that took auto shop class, you only mention 2, your daughter and the girl who moved away.

The other three girls were unsuccessful at securing work in their field of study; I think two went back to school and one returned to her old career.

You belittle the other girl, saying that she moved to an area 'desperate for workers",

Stating what she did isn't "belittling" her; in an area desperate for workers, it's easier to get a job.

while your daughter is stuck in her minimum wage job. Who is smarter? Don't most people generally follow prosperity? Or is it better to stay put and accept lower economics?

Honestly, I understand my daughter's decision, though I don't necessarily agree with it.

then she has to be seen by others as a competent professional, and in time she will gain the respect of others .

As I've mentioned, I believe she'll get there. I also believe her gender is just going to make it a little bit more difficult for her. When was the last time, btw, one of your co-workers slapped your butt or made a suggestive remark about "getting it on", or "nice rack"? Even all other things being equal, this is the kind of thing that happens a LOT when women try entering male-dominated fields. My daughter just laughs it off; other women become upset and quit and still others will go the sexual harassment route.

Then you go on to presume that this scenario represents all jobs in all fields in America.

I don't live in America. I do think it respresents what happens a substantial number of times when someone tries to obtain a job for which they are not "gender" appropriate, according to societal standards. And, as I mentioned, it doesn't apply JUST to women trying to go into traditionally male-dominated fields, but also to men trying to enter traditionally female-dominated fields.

That's a mighty big stretch.

Actually, it's not; its well established that these barriers exist in many fields and between different groups.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 54
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 3:47:50 PM

mmm ... hard to believe when one looks around --
Who holds the majority of high-paying, high-prestige, and well-paid jobs ... why, lo and behold, it's white men!
Even after 50 years of attempting to change the status quo, the above is still true.
It's just not as true as it used to be, which, translated, means there are women in some of those positions and, much to some American's dismay, a Black man leading the country!

I seriously do not see how a group of people who demonstrably hold the highest positions in the society can be discriminated against. It's like the Queen of England complaining because, dammit, not everybody is bowing down to her.


This is so irrational and simplistic I don't know either to laugh or to cry.

It's like saying just because Obama is the president, every black person on the planet is more privileged than whites.

You American liberals are so illogical.

Let's look at reality here, how much percent of white males hold any such power or are in important positions in society? My guess would be around 1 percent?

So if 1 percent of white males hold power in society, how is it that me and every other white male on the planet can be immune to discrimination or have it so fine and dandy as your liberals like to harp on about?

I want to quote more of what you and others said but not just now. Just that quote alone makes me laugh big time.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 55
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 3:58:12 PM

I can't help it if the overwhelming majority of domestic violence is perpetrated by men.


My god people are so ignorant.

Educate your self instead of making a fool of your self.

http://www.mediaradar.org/research.php#waj
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 56
view profile
History
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 6:09:28 PM

Where these professors white and male, by chance?


Yes, they were. But how is that relevant to whether they were pressured to favor certain applicants as I described?


I've seen some of your statements before turn out to be ... inaccurate. Could you post a link or source?


Yes, I could--but considering that you've accused me of making inaccurate statements, without backing it up by saying what they were, or where I made them, or how you think they were inaccurate, I'm not going to bother. If anyone else doubts what I said about the court cases, they can say so.


who denied women legal personhood


What are you referring to, specifically?


and felt fully justified in declaring an entire ethnic group subhuman.


Which of the men who founded this country are you claiming considered blacks "subhuman," and how are you claiming they declared them that? Please don't make me have to refute, for the umpteenth time, that tired old piece of anti-American propaganda that the Constitution considers blacks only "three-fifths of a person."


Fortunately, some men with integrity . . . have managed to modify that definition of freedom to be more inclusive.


Yes--more than 350,000 of them were Union boys, almost all white, who died freeing blacks in the Civil War. In terms of our population today, that would be like more than three million dead in four years.


I'll bet you think you aren't following a party line, right?


I know I'm not. I do my own research and draw my own conclusions.


You imagine yourself some last bastion defender of free speech and the American way?


Every American should defend those things.


Well, I see your 'party line' a lot


Well, no, you don't. As I said, I don't have any such thing.


so I guess the Liberal PC's dastardly plan just isn't working!


It certainly doesn't work on me, because I could not care less whether they like my views.


So, offering respect to everyone is "un-American" and "anti-democratic"? I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.


Those are your words, not mine.


You object to mulitculturalism and diversity? You really are a man out of time, aren't you?


Yes, I do--strongly. And no, I don't think I am, at all. If anyone is out of time, it is leftists who are stuck back in the Thirties, calling for the same centralized government control that characterized the New Deal. Most of the New Deal and its progeny has been a colossal failure, and parts of it, like Social Security and Medicare, are threatening to destroy this country--and our liberties with it. But that doesn't stop so-called liberals from worshipping at the altar of central planning.


To imagine that democracy is threatened by diversity of peoples is a remarkable twist of logic; democracy is about the majority deciding society's direction - and the majority can be any color or creed. I should think inclusivity would be a hallmark of democracy, not considered an attack.


That's a remarkable (and not very convincing) attempt to distort what I wrote. Diversity, as you are describing it, occurs naturally and certainly is a positive thing. It's entirely consistent with our American motto "E Pluribus Unum." But as I think you know, I was referring to another kind of diversity--the kind which has been imposed by coercion in schools, workplaces, and elsewhere, and which has come to be glorified for its own sake. In that context, "diversity" is nothing but a benign-sounding euphemism for discrimination against whites, and particularly white men.


she didn't actually mean *her* contraceptives.


Of course she did. She was a law student at Georgetown--and as you yourself said,"her goal was to have Georgetown university offer contraception as part of their health care program." But she was plumping generally for contraceptives as part of mandatory government health care--obviously other people would be paying for it.


Anyway, what's a few dollars for contraception


It's a few dollars too much, if the federal government has no authority--as I believe it hasn't--to coerce people into paying it. States, in contrast, have authority to do what they want. Whether a state chooses to subsidize contraceptives, abortions, etc. for its residents, or not, or a little, or a lot, is up to the majority in that state.


Although, the supposed bastion of free speech and freedom probably figures they have the right to control the nation's sexual behavior.


I've never seen a bastion figure anything, so I'm not sure just who you're referring to. I don't know if you feel you have a right to control the sexual behavior of everyone in the U.S., but I damn sure don't feel I do.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 57
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 6:42:44 PM


mmm ... hard to believe when one looks around --
Who holds the majority of high-paying, high-prestige, and well-paid jobs ... why, lo and behold, it's white men!
Even after 50 years of attempting to change the status quo, the above is still true.
It's just not as true as it used to be, which, translated, means there are women in some of those positions and, much to some American's dismay, a Black man leading the country!

I seriously do not see how a group of people who demonstrably hold the highest positions in the society can be discriminated against. It's like the Queen of England complaining because, dammit, not everybody is bowing down to her.


This is so irrational and simplistic I don't know either to laugh or to cry.

It's like saying just because Obama is the president, every black person on the planet is more privileged than whites.


That’s exactly not what Mr. 4’s said…

What he said was that white males hold 94% of all CEO positions on the Fortune 1000…of the 193 countries recognized by the United Nations 6.2% of the heads of government are women…the US congress is comprised of 21% women….there are 5 women governors in the 50 states.



Let's look at reality here, how much percent of white males hold any such power or are in important positions in society? My guess would be around 1 percent?


You really don’t understand do you…see above^^^^…but, to answer your silly question…more than 90% of all top positions are held by men.


So if 1 percent of white males hold power in society, how is it that me and every other white male on the planet can be immune to discrimination or have it so fine and dandy as your liberals like to harp on about?


I still can’t wrap my mind around this foolishness.


You American liberals are so illogical.


Hold on now!!! Oh my…the irony….OP’s an Aussie citing an American author, in his OPost, complaining about women whining about wage gender discrimination in America …

If there aren't as many female CEOs, are people open minded enough to realize it's because on a general basis, women with children choose lifestyle/family choices over career? As explained in studies verified from the US department of labor?




Yes, I could--but considering that you've accused me of making inaccurate statements, without backing it up by


Every time I point out your glaring falsehoods you vanish…look here: http://forums.plentyoffish.com/15906913datingPostpage3.aspx
Posts #62, 66, and lastly 72 where you omitted most of the crux of Judge Scalia’s dissenting comment …

And let’s go with this piece of garbage:


Which of the men who founded this country are you claiming considered blacks "subhuman," and how are you claiming they declared them that? Please don't make me have to refute, for the umpteenth time, that tired old piece of anti-American propaganda that the Constitution considers blacks only "three-fifths of a person."


The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the enumerated population of slaves would be counted for representation purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position.

The Three-Fifths Compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:


Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

Geeze…I can hear the meatloaf rumbling in the tummy now…you’ll come back and play semantic and say it’s not 3/5ths of a person…but, you’d be using that neocon GOP math again…the math validates 3/5ths of a person.


I know I'm not. I do my own research and draw my own conclusions.


Is that why you cut out Judge Scalia’s relevant passage from that cut n paste you did in that other thread???



To imagine that democracy is threatened by diversity of peoples is a remarkable twist of logic; democracy is about the majority deciding society's direction - and the majority can be any color or creed. I should think inclusivity would be a hallmark of democracy, not considered an attack.



That's a remarkable (and not very convincing) attempt to distort what I wrote


Oh, I read what you wrote and came away with the same conclusions 4’s did..I was convinced by your original post and by 4’s take on it…and I’ve had the benefit of seeing your views on race for a while now…and of course I’ve also know that one white man’s perception of reverse-discrimination is a generally a cover for racism.


I've never seen a bastion figure anything, so I'm not sure just who you're referring to. I don't know if you feel you have a right to control the sexual behavior of everyone in the U.S., but I damn sure don't feel I do.


Blind faith in the party of the Reich.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 58
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 7:02:26 PM

What he said was that white males hold 94% of all CEO positions on the Fortune 1000…of the 193 countries recognized by the United Nations 6.2% of the heads of government are women…the US congress is comprised of 21% women….there are 5 women governors in the 50 states.


I wonder how many white males even GET THE CHANCE to be in these positions? Oh, would it be 1% of the white male population? I have so much privilege, I'm practically swimming in it. heh


You really don’t understand do you


I perfectly understand. Loony lefty liberals exaggerate white male privilege/power times a million.


I still can’t wrap my mind around this foolishness.


Seems like you can't wrap your head around truth and rationality. After all, you think any criticism and snarky remark towards women who complain about men is misogyny. It's funny how you avoided answering the question to my analogy that holds similar grounds.


Hold on now!!! Oh my…the irony….OP’s an Aussie citing an American author, in his OPost, complaining about women whining about wage gender discrimination in America …


And....how is this illogical? Are you making things up out of thin air again? This seems to be a habit of yours.
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 59
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 9:16:03 PM
^^^^^^
"Is that why you cut out Judge Scalia’s relevant passage from that cut n paste you did in that other thread???"

"BBI", is it wise to use THIS forum to complain about a comment in a different forum thread? How mush sense does that make?
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 60
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 9:29:18 PM

I can't figure out if you're whining about all the poor men in the workplace or just whining to be heard


Yes, how dare I expose this and express my thoughts on it. Us males aren't worthy enough to, right? It's okay to have feminism and whine and whine and whine for 50 odd years about how hard poor women have it. But when a thread is made about men not having it all super fine and dandy like feminists claim we do, ZOMG it shouldn't be allowed!

How dare men have the same freedom of speech that feminists are so entitled to have!

Speaking of accusing me of whining, you then have the audacity in your same post to complain, or shall I call it whining, about how us evil males are so privileged and powerful.

What part of this don't you loony feminists/liberals understand? The only people who have power and privilege are the individual people, who are a handful, that are in these positions. Pay very close attention how I used the word "individual".

Just because I share the same gender and skin colour of these people, this doesn't mean I also share their privilege and power. That said, why should their gender and race come into it? After all, they are INDIVIDUAL people doing their jobs. What has being white and being male have to do with their job?

Using your insanely laughable logic, I can say that Australia is controlled by female privilege and power because the PM is a woman.

So funny how people are so shameless with their foolish double standards.

Just imagine if I made a big deal about a PM or president being a woman? Just imagine if I made a big deal about a PM or president being black? What I mean by this is complain about the fact that they are a woman or a black person. I would be deemed as a bigoted, racist, sexist, idiot, right?

But it seems all okay for people to whine about a person in power being a white male simply because they are a white male. It's 100 percent socially acceptable for someone to have a problem with a person who is in a high status position solely because they are a white male. No one will be calling them a bigot, racist, sexist etc etc.

Gotta love double standards.



If you want to tow the misogynist line, go ahead.


99 percent of the time, the accusation of being a misogynist is just used to either silence or slander people. Just because I have supportive opinions for my gender, the loony leftists/liberal/feminists deem it as misogyny.

This is why I have no respect for the word no more. I find it hard to take the word "misogynist" seriously as its so damn misused. People have abused it and misused it so much that now its just a worthless word in my books.



And if you have real facts to back up your word, post it because you haven't done it so far.


Please elaborate.



And if you and your little white guy buddies feel so hard done by, try being a man of colour or a woman of any colour.


Imagine if I spoke in that tone about women and blacks?

Just because others don't have it easy also, us white males are never allowed to talk about the problems we go through. We are all expected to be silent and deferential. We are expected to be good little submissive puppy dogs and turn the other cheek. Everyone else is allowed to have a voice though, only white males are expected to shut up.

If you genuinely and really and truly want equality, this would mean that you agree that males/white males are entitled to EQUAL freedom of speech compared to any other group. But it seems people like you can't handle REAL equality which comes with equal freedom of speech. I am hard pressed to find a feminist/liberal who actually wants democracy. You lot may claim that you do but your actions speak louder than your words.

EDIT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eCnmeaoGMA

A good video about how much feminists hate white men and also about other things that loony feminists do.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 61
view profile
History
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/15/2013 10:45:14 PM
the math validates 3/5ths of a person.


I already knew the history of the Three-Fifths Compromise--and I hope you know something about it too, now that you've consulted Wikipedia.

What's ironic is that you don't realize you're making my point by citing that history. It shows that the issue this constitutional compromise resolved was purely political--the balance of power in the House and the Electoral College between Northern and Southern states. I mentioned the Three-Fifths Compromise because the poster I was responding to had implied the Founders thought blacks were "subhuman." That made me wonder if she'd cite the compromise--falsely--as evidence they did. That is a very well-worn ruse I've seen so-called liberals use many times, here and elsewhere.

That slander, meant to persuade the gullible that the United States was created by vile racists and therefore is built on a rotten foundation, was a staple of communist propaganda during the days of the Soviet Union. And even now, it's still popular among down-with-America leftists. Some of them don't know any better themselves and probably hope that parroting this tripe will make them seem clever and worldly.

The more calculating ones realize that for forty years now our public schools have been turning out millions of ignoramuses who got what little they think they know about American history from Howard Zinn's "People's History of the U.S.," from incompetent and biased teachers, from movies by Michael Moore, and from the pronouncements of profound leftist intellectuals like Janeane Garofalo. And they know this exposure to anti-American propaganda has made these drones ready to swallow even more of it.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 62
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 5:00:40 AM
Yes, Wikipedia, as a quick reference point, is my friend.

I, personally, have never thought that the original constitution built a flawed foundation for this wonderful country…as you’ve stated before, and correctly, it incorporated mechanisms to change and adapt. Though, blacks and women were considered property at the time, I viewed this as a social norm, for that time, that was corrected, albeit with great resistance, through constitutional amendments, acts, and laws.

I find it ludicrous that persons, blacks, who could not vote, and were considered 3/5ths of a person for the purposes of balancing power between the states supports the notion that slaves (black people) weren’t considered sub human…well, let’s not rewrite that important piece of history, shall we? Slaves were considered property as were women….differently…but still property…while there were free blacks at the time-there still were slaves…while there were free women at the time-married women were considered the property of their husbands….and neither were allowed to vote…when that first writing of the constitution spoke about all men being equal…they, without question or a rewriting of history, meant white men….they excluded slaves or women.

And just as there still is wage gender discrimination today there still is racial discrimination…though, to a much lesser degree, and more overt, than those bygone years….before constitutional amendments, acts, and laws were made to force, yes force, white men to view blacks and women as equals.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 63
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 5:22:21 AM
bigbadnirish

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/the-myth-of-womens-oppression/

You may find this article interesting. It points out the exaggeration and lies about how females were treated in the past.

Firstly, only rich white men were allowed to vote, then ALL men were allowed. It was only a short period, maybe a decade, (I'm too tired to look up the exact amount of time) that ALL men could vote and ALL women couldn't.

That said, it's silly to say that women were treated as property throughout history. Last time I checked, women were freely able to divorce and leave their husbands any time they wanted. I've never heard of a slave or someone treated as property to have that freedom.

But there was a case of old money families which was something pretty rare.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 64
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 5:47:54 AM
Hahahahahaha…and I wonder why I would want to teach an Aussie American history…


Firstly, only rich white men were allowed to vote, then ALL men were allowed. It was only a short period, maybe a decade, (I'm too tired to look up the exact amount of time) that ALL men could vote and ALL women couldn't.


When you say ALL men…and, in fact, slaves were not allowed to vote….are you then making the racist comment that black men were not men?

Slaves were not given the right to vote until the 15th amendment, in 1870…way longer than a decade…and then only black men were given the right to vote…and then the Jim Crow laws made voting darn near impossible for blacks to vote until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Women were not given the right to vote until the 19th amendment in 1920.

Married women as property:



It's complex because no single law was ever passed at a certain date. A complete answer would involve a comprehensive survey of laws in early America, laws that controlled inheritance and property. There was no single law that stated, "Women are the property of their husbands". A woman's place in the world was carved out by ancient legal principals and traditions that evolved over centuries such as:

Women were denied a separate legal status from their husbands.
A husband and wife were considered one person under the law and that one person was the husband.
Women were denied rights of inheritance.
Women were denied the right to own property in their own right.
Men could be compensated for the loss of a wife due to another man's negligence.
Men paid a bride price to the parents of his wife in the same way he purchased livestock.


The legal status of women varied in different regions in early America. Single women could inherit and purchase property in many states. However, if she married that property automatically came under her husband's control. In Massachusetts, one can find ancient deeds that explicitly provided the property was to be held exclusively by the woman free from the control of her husband. Those restrictions were apparently followed. Also in Massachusetts, a woman didn't become a legal heir of her husband until around 1904. Before that a man's children inherited his property when he died.

The common laws that formed the legal barriers to women acquiring their own separate legal status fell slowly in various states at various times. By the nineteenth century states began enacting laws that allow a married woman to own property in her own right and to write a will.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_were_US_women_no_longer_the_property_of_their_husbands
 FatBottomGirI
Joined: 6/28/2011
Msg: 65
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 7:10:00 AM
I have met many a male chef that thinks like you. The professional kitchen is still a "boys club" and I spent years fighting my way to the top despite some male chefs trying to hold me back. Now that I have reached executive chef level its with great pleasure and enthusiasm that I am now able to hire qualified female chefs. I was so pleased to read about recently the first woman to be running the air force acadamy.

I applaud the female cops, doctors, lawyers , fire fighters, soldiers etc that have made a career for themselves in fields that have always been "boys clus"

Y'all don't know the life threatening hardships that a CEO must face? Don't you know that corner offices, expressos, $3,000 bottles of champagn, caviar, and expensive vacations that these poor men have to endure? :( How can you be so heartless to ignore their struggles?
 FatBottomGirI
Joined: 6/28/2011
Msg: 66
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 7:33:34 AM
4ms4me,

I remember reading about a garage somewhere that was owned by women and all of the mechanics are women. Maybe your daughter could start her own garage? I know if I found a garage like that many women would make it a point to use that location. I know I would. We have to support each other thats the only way things ever change.
 Celje
Joined: 6/18/2012
Msg: 67
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 8:10:25 AM
Being in the auto biz for 16 years i've noticed how customers trust female service advisors more simply by being a female, the irony is women compete with each other way more then men, and are more willing to lie to increase their bottom line consistantly. A boss don't care, they just want their bottom line too, business is business.

An industry that's usually feast or famine, working full commision doesn't help either.
 vibrantshe
Joined: 3/21/2011
Msg: 68
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 11:17:21 AM
As a woman and a feminist who has an office.

To Do List:
• Turn up air-conditioning
• Whine
• File and clean nails
• Appreciate life threating hardships CEO men go through for the all of us to survive
 whippedboi
Joined: 3/12/2013
Msg: 69
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 12:27:45 PM

Nonetheless, their quasi-spokesperson, Rush Limbaugh, then felt qualified to call her a slut and make other slurs. Hmmm ... what were you saying above about trying to shut people up?


are you referring to the DRUG ADDICT &, HYPOCRITE Rush Limbaugh? ..yes while blabbering and prosetylizng about the evils of drugs & drug users, this porker got himself addicted to Oxycodin and obtained it illegally in the black market

quite outrageous that a liar, hypocrite & drug addict such as Limbaugh would think himself fit to pronounce on hte 'ethical' or 'moral' choices of others.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 70
view profile
History
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 12:37:41 PM
#69

I remember reading about a garage somewhere that was owned by women and all of the mechanics are women.


All of them? I'd think that in an industry so heavily dominated by men most of the applications for mechanic received by this garage, wherever it was, must have come from men. What happened to all the male applicants, then? It seems like you're just fine with sex discrimination in the workplace, as long as the sex being discriminated against is men.


I know if I found a garage like that many women would make it a point to use that location.


And they would need to, because I'm pretty sure most men would make it a point never to use it. Assuming a business like that could operate under state and federal employment laws, which I doubt, why would we men want to support it? I would suspect that a place which so obviously discriminated against men in hiring might also be unfriendly to male customers. And if a garage doesn't have some girlie calendars on the wall, I don't trust it anyway.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 71
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 2:55:41 PM
BigBadNIrish



There was no single law that stated, "Women are the property of their husbands"


There ya have it.

Feminists and the extreme left people make out that most or all men were evil tyrant back in them times. Nice way to generalise the male population, it's a pity that no one see's the sexism in that.



Men paid a bride price to the parents of his wife in the same way he purchased livestock.


Why did men have to pay pay pay and women paid nothing when it came to marriage?

Feminists/leftists love to twist things around to make men look bad. Men didn't own these women, as I said, these women had a free choice to either say "no I don't want to marry this twirp" and they had the choice to divorce and leave their husband any time. So please stop talking this claptrap.

The only instance of forced arranged marriages and true ownership that you are harping on about is with the old money families which was few and far between. Feminists and the people like you love to exaggerate it and make out it was happening everywhere.

As explained in the article I provided, no wonder why women couldn't own properties at that time. I wonder who was WILLING and way more likely to be able to protect the property?

FatBottomGirI



I have met many a male chef that thinks like you.


What do you mean "think like me"? Just because I disagree with feminist inspired exaggerated and outright lies against men and how women were and are treated, this makes me a discriminator against women in the workplace? Jumping jesus, is a male ever allowed to simply disagree with all these outrageous claims against his gender without being DISCRIMINATED against for it?

It's like that a male has to agree with any claim against his gender or else he is condemned! He's not allowed to have the same freedom of speech that goes in the opposite direction. He's a misogynist otherwise. It's a pity that people don't see the discrimination in that.



The professional kitchen is still a "boys club" and I spent years fighting my way to the top despite some male chefs trying to hold me back


Firstly, I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen female head chefs when working in the hospitality industry. So I think you may be imagining things here.

I'm not saying men are innocent angels and I am not saying that this doesn't happen. But what annoys me is that nearly EVERYTIME a woman or a person from a minority group doesn't make it up the career ladder, they blame men/white men for it. They don't stop to think that men/white also fail at making it up the ladder for various reasons. It's a matter of luck.

It's so easy for people like you to just blame men for your failings ,which of course is sexist, instead of looking in the mirror or observing that not everyone, even men/white men, don;t get to where they want to be in life also. Women and minority groups aren't the only ones that find it hard and who fail in getting to where they want to be.



Now that I have reached executive chef level its with great pleasure and enthusiasm that I am now able to hire qualified female chefs


Can you see the hypocrisy? You are probably giving females preferential treatment over male applicants due to your sexist assumption that most male chefs are evil discriminators so now you get to have revenge.



Y'all don't know the life threatening hardships that a CEO must face?


Someone tried to pull this on me earlier in this thread. I never ever mentioned that people in CEO positions have it bad. My point was that the lowest, most dangerous, most life shortening jobs held in society are mostly held by men.

Here's something worth to consider.

http://stakedintheheart.com/2012/08/07/do-any-women-work-at-the-dirty-difficult-and-dangerous-jobs-that-men-do-any-women-at-all/

The funniest thing about this is that we never hear feminists complaining about equal numbers in these positions. Gotta laugh at the hypocrisy.



I remember reading about a garage somewhere that was owned by women and all of the mechanics are women. Maybe your daughter could start her own garage? I know if I found a garage like that many women would make it a point to use that location. I know I would. We have to support each other that's the only way things ever change.


At least one other person in this thread realised this hypocrisy. It never ceases to amaze me how people seem to think that gender discrimination is ONLY BAD when women are on the receiving end. This women's garage is doing the exact same thing that they are apparently against. You are also claiming how great it is while on the other hand, how bad and sad it is when it happens to women.

The bottom line is that one of the most common forms of discrimination in western societies is male/white male scapegoating.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 72
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 3:00:36 PM

There was no single law that stated, "Women are the property of their husbands"

There ya have it.


Certiany OP continues to prove his ignorance of American history...and post opinions that can lead to the conclusion many of us here have come to...a misogynist in denial.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 73
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 3:07:12 PM

a misogynist in denial.


So I'm a misogynist simply because I disagree? Me as a male hasn't got the right to disagree? Me as a male hasn't got the right to have my own opinion? Me as a male hasn't got the right to democracy?

Can you see the sexism against men within its self by your attitude? It seems that we aren't allowed to disagree with an view that's in favour of women.

You think any male is a misogynist simply because they disagree with exaggeration and lies about their gender.

How dare we have opinions of our own, we're not allowed!

If you're allowed to call me a misogynist, I'm allowed to call you a gynocentrist.
 FatBottomGirI
Joined: 6/28/2011
Msg: 74
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 3:46:52 PM
Really? I have been working in kitchens for 15 years now and more often not I was the only female in those kitchens.

Black people had to create black universities, clubs, etc because the white man shut them out of the American dream. So they found a way to the American dream on their own and then helped others who were black find their road to the American dream.

White men have discriminated against people of color and women for centuries. Each group, including women have had to find away to work around it. In return, we have to also make it a point to help other women climb the ladder of success. The culinary world is still to "unevolved" to not reach out and help other female chefs succeed. And I will never apologize for that.

http://www.gastronomica.org/why-are-there-no-great-women-chefs

http://host.madison.com/entertainment/dining/restaurants/a-room-of-her-own-where-are-the-female-executive/article_ba0c8254-948b-11e1-a085-0019bb2963f4.html


*********** On a side note- The female operated garage I was talking about was featured on Oprah. It's called Lucious Garage and its in San Francisco.
 tie_me_up81
Joined: 1/1/2013
Msg: 75
With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions
Posted: 3/16/2013 3:51:03 PM
Ummm, and whose choice is it to work in these type of jobs?


Of course it's their choice, I never said they are forced.

The whole point to this thread is about "choices"...just like it's the women's choice not to become CEOs due to family commitments. This leads to less females compared to males climbing the ladder in this competition. So therefore, it's inevitable that the outcome will be that it will most likely be a male who will fill these positions. If there are 10 males and 5 females going for the same position, who is more likely going to get it? A male or female?

What percent of the whole population can be a CEO? How many CEO positions are available when comparing the whole human population?

Again, I find it funny how feminists are silent about no equal numbers in the most dangerous and crappiest jobs while jumping up and down about no equal numbers in the best jobs.

Edit:

Female privilege?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQUYME_bYuI

Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > With all the whining about men hold most CEO positions