The Eloquent Professor - Deconstructing America

[Moonbeam]

I'm seeing evidence that for a Neanderthal to maintain Neanderthal status, he needs to exclude from consciousness certain evidence that is obvious to Modern Man.

By this I mean that the points raised by Texashiker to justify the inequality in pay that women receive for work they do, a fact apparently accepted, is a complaint without merit because women won't do all the different kinds of work men will do, must exclude from consideration, in order to maintain any logical validity, the fact that the actual complaint is that women do not receive equal pay in jobs they do work at that men may also work at but at higher pay.

In order to make my point succinctly, I used a metaphor based on an old and probably incorrect assumption that Neanderthal man was more primitive mentally than the modern humans he came in contact with and more primitive than us, and I also assumed that the evidence being excluded from consciousness would be obvious, at least to anybody evolved to the level of modern man.

But the real dilemma, as with the dilemma posed by somebody like boomerang who actually admires the garbage he posted, cannot be fixed with factual data because it is factual data that is being excluded from consciousness in the first place. We are faced with two different manifestations of bigotry, one the assumption that women deserve less because they are less willing to contribute, and another worshiping the bigotry expressed in a gratuitous polemical screed.

The problem, of course, is that while you can tell a bigot, and naturally only if he doesn't have the same bigotry that you might have, you can in fact not tell him much. The nature of bigotry is that it can't accommodate evidence that runs contrary to it. And the reason for that is that bigotry is a form of ego identification, an inculcation of belief before the onset of reason that being a bigot is good.

Being willing to d dangerous work is a virtue that should be rewarded. Who would argue with that? Having the right political view and anything that supports that view is good. Who could argue with that? A bigot can't be shaken from his belief because what he believes is good. Good is good and always to be preferred to evil.

The challenge, then, as I see it, is not to change the opinion of a bigot, but to find a way to assure him that good is real and does not depend on ones belief. If we connect the good with some form of belief, we come to believe that the good dies if the belief does. Ego is the belief that one is good because what one believes is good and that if what one believes is good isn't good than one is worthless. That is the real truth that we hide, that we have ego because we actually feel worthless.

This brings us to one final point, the fact that our feelings of worthlessness, what we actually believe because it is the truth of what we feel, are in fact lies, that there is nothing wrong with us except that we had to believe in lies to survive. Only a vanishingly small number of people remember what happened to them and have real and actual data that allows them to heal, but that is what happens when you remember. There is a good beyond measure, a treasure hidden within, a true self who knows who God really is, the reality of being.

 

[Texashiker]

I'm seeing evidence that for a Neanderthal to maintain Neanderthal status, he needs to exclude from consciousness certain evidence that is obvious to Modern Man. <snip>

There is a good beyond measure, a treasure hidden within, a true self who knows who God really is, the reality of being.

That was a well written reply.

However, am I a bigot because I expect women to do the same kinds of work that men do? Isn't that what the womens liberation and the feminist movement are all about, that a woman can do a job just as good as a man?

When certain fields of work are opened up to women, the majority of women (not all women) will not take the job.

Respect is earned, and not given. If women want respect in the workforce, then "fully" integrate into the workforce.

Not everyone can be a COO, CEO, CFO, lawyer, doctor, legal assistant,,,, and only work cushy office jobs. What types of jobs do the majority of women (not all women) workers apply for? Its the 5-8, low overtime, little danger to life and limb office jobs.

I fully support womens rights. I support their right to get a job in construction, and have a finger or hand tore off just like what men do. I support a womans right to be killed or injured in a refinery explosion (one example) just like what men do. Step up to the base and lets play ball.

To inject my personal experience, I saw a man get killed in a welding shop in 1989. I heard his screams, saw the blood, I operated the crane to get the 7 ton piece of steel off of him. When the feminist movement fights for womens rights in those types of jobs, please let me know.

Mostly because men decided that the world should work that way.

This goes back to the feminist movement. Should dirty, dangerous, demeaning jobs be open to women, as well as men?

 

[3chordcharlie]

The article in the opening post there is a comment about men running the world.

That statement is true and correct, partially because men are willing to do the jobs most women will not do.

If we accept your claim at face value ("men are willing to do the jobs most women will not do") we are still left with the fact that the men who run the world are not the same men doing these jobs.

I heard dell computers started out in a garage. If that is true, who swept the garage floor?

This is much more 'exception proves the rule' than anything else. The truly self-made are inspirational, impressive, and exceedingly rare.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

This goes back to the feminist movement. Should dirty, dangerous, demeaning jobs be open to women, as well as men?

Absolutely.

But I think you're missing the boat lumping those three "D" words together.

Do men do more of the dangerous work than women? Sure.

But dirty and demeaning? I'd argue it's the opposite.

Here's a list of the top 15 occupations for men in 2008, per the Census Bureau:

Driver/sales workers and truck drivers
Managers, all other
First-line supervisors/managers of retail sales workers
Janitors and building cleaners
Retail salespersons
Construction laborers
Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers, hand
Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing
Carpenters
First-line supervisors/managers of construction trades and extraction workers
Chief executives
First-line supervisors/managers of non-retail sales workers
First-line supervisors/managers of production and operating workers
Accountants and auditors
Construction managers

I only see 4 or 5 of those 15 as jobs I'd consider difficult, tedious, demanding or unrewarding (other than financial compensation). It's mostly managers and executives.

And let's also note that there isn't much in the way of dangerous jobs here either.

Now the list for women:

Secretaries and administrative assistants
Elementary and middle school teachers
Registered nurses
Nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides
First-line supervisors/managers of retail sales workers
Customer service representatives
Accountants and auditors
Bookkeeping, accounting, and auditing clerks
First-line supervisors/managers of office and administrative support workers
Managers, all other
Cashiers
Retail salespersons
Office clerks, general
Receptionists and information clerks
Maids and housekeeping cleaners
Child care workers

Far more jobs that fall into the "dirty" or "demeaning" categories, at least in my opinion. Ever stayed in a hospital and seen what nurses and healthcare aides have to put up with on a daily basis? I wouldn't last a week.

Also noteworthy is how many more management jobs are on the men's lists than the women's. The source lists about 30 or so top occupations for both men and women.. "Chief executives" doesn't even show up on the women's list.

Now add homemaking into the mix -- one of the most difficult, unrewarding and underappreciated jobs in our society. And done mostly by women.

 

[Texashiker]

Far more jobs that fall into the "dirty" or "demeaning" categories, at least in my opinion. Ever stayed in a hospital and seen what nurses and healthcare aides have to put up with on a daily basis? I wouldn't last a week.

Also noteworthy is how many more management jobs are on the men's lists than the women's. The source lists about 30 or so top occupations for both men and women.. "Chief executives" doesn't even show up on the women's list.

Now add homemaking into the mix -- one of the most difficult, unrewarding and underappreciated jobs in our society. And done mostly by women.

I would not last 5 minutes in a nursing job, screw that, I would be out of there.

As much as the feminist movement wishes to deny it, there are physical and physiological differences in how men and women handle different jobs.

I took today off to go to the doctors office for some test. One of those test was some blood work. After the lady finished drawing my blood, a few seconds later I passed out. The next thing I remember is waking up on the floor surrounded by a bunch of women nurses.

As I have said before, I fully support womens rights in the workplace. Women should be paid just as much as a man for the same job duties.

Men do some jobs better then women, women do some jobs better then men. I think it is foolish for feminist to think otherwise.

For jobs that men and women preform equally, then the pay should be equal.

 

[Moonbeam]

Texashiker: However, am I a bigot because I expect women to do the same kinds of work that men do? Isn't that what the womens liberation and the feminist movement are all about, that a woman can do a job just as good as a man?

M: This has been covered over and over now. The answer doesn't satisfy you because you have other things going on in your head we will get to in a minute. But the answer is that women who do the exact same job as a man doing the same work as she is should mean she gets the same pay as he does, and that's not how things are.

T: When certain fields of work are opened up to women, the majority of women (not all women) will not take the job.

M: True and irrelevant.

T: Respect is earned, and not given.

M: True and irrelevant

T: If women want respect in the workforce, then "fully" integrate into the workforce.

M: Bigotry. Many men will not take any job. The fact of gender and job is irrelevant to respect. Respect is earned by doing whatever it is that you do well. People also falsely give respect to folk who make a lot of money. A lousy CEO will get more respect than a man who will dig a ditch and dig it well. You take the good that goes with striving for excellence and confuse it with gender issues and the range of jobs a person may be willing to do. It doesn't make sense. There is no real connection.

T: Not everyone can be a COO, CEO, CFO, lawyer, doctor, legal assistant,,,, and only work cushy office jobs. What types of jobs do the majority of women (not all women) workers apply for? Its the 5-8, low overtime, little danger to life and limb office jobs.

M: Yes and they don't get the same pay for doing those exact jobs as men who do them get. That isn't right. The salary of a person who might be willing to do a 1000 other jobs should be no different for somebody doing that job who will only do 100 different ones. We are paid for what we do, not what we are willing to do. Otherwise, men who will not dig a ditch for a living should get less pay in an office job than one who will. Right there is where your argument breaks down. Do you see it? Do you want to see it?

T: I fully support womens rights. I support their right to get a job in construction, and have a finger or hand tore off just like what men do. I support a womans right to be killed or injured in a refinery explosion (one example) just like what men do. Step up to the base and lets play ball.

M: You don't get to play. You only throw curve balls so you won't really pitch. You get no respect until you're willing to pitch. You keep throwing yourself the soft balls.

T: To inject my personal experience, I saw a man get killed in a welding shop in 1989. I heard his screams, saw the blood, I operated the crane to get the 7 ton piece of steel off of him. When the feminist movement fights for womens rights in those types of jobs, please let me know.

M: They do and if a woman applies and gets the job she should get equal pay for it. People have a right to choice of job. That's what the job market is all about, pricing a job sufficiently to attract a sufficient number of folk qualified to do it. If a person had the desire to take a job at a particular price and they do it as well as others, they should get the same pay as those others and not less because or their gender. Discrimination by gender is bigotry. You are bigoted against women because they don't want to do certain jobs. That's preposterous as is your reasoning for justifying it. Would you be happier if that piece of steel fell on a pregnant welder? You will lose none of your stature in life, none of your good feeling, nothing at all but bigotry if you drop your irrational opinion. The greatest woman garbage collector doesn't make you worthless as a man or a crane operator, my friend.

T: This goes back to the feminist movement. Should dirty, dangerous, demeaning jobs be open to women, as well as men?

M: Aren't qualified women now going to be allowed to take part in combat in the US military? The claim was they were being denied the opportunity to achieve the same level of prestige as men were for promotions.

 

[lotus503]

I would not last 5 minutes in a nursing job, screw that, I would be out of there.

As much as the feminist movement wishes to deny it, there are physical and physiological differences in how men and women handle different jobs.

I took today off to go to the doctors office for some test. One of those test was some blood work. After the lady finished drawing my blood, a few seconds later I passed out. The next thing I remember is waking up on the floor surrounded by a bunch of women nurses.

As I have said before, I fully support womens rights in the workplace. Women should be paid just as much as a man for the same job duties.

Men do some jobs better then women, women do some jobs better then men. I think it is foolish for feminist to think otherwise.

For jobs that men and women preform equally, then the pay should be equal.

Now were getting somewhere. Once you lose your requirement of shitty jobs & working your way up to executive positions we will be on the same page.

Not saying I am the only C level exec in the thread. But I assure you most C level execs are not in that position because they started off cleaning the office or in the mailroom.

Unless you are self made, you would be hard pressed to get a CEO job without at least a masters. definetly wont get Fortune 1000 CEO work without a masters. Unless it was a company you founded.

 

[irishScott]

He needs to take a grade school writing class.

Fixed.

Certainly it can no longer be denied: the progressive infiltration of our Fourth Estate and our intellectual academies are effectively complete. Although both were once highly regarded institutions, they have been thoroughly compromised as willing organs dedicated towards ushering in the Gospel of the Benevolent State. However, in order to make straight the steps leading to the Beautiful Lands, it became necessary to throw one's professional integrity under the freight train and to sell one's temporal soul for thirty pieces of silver and the respectability that one rightfully accrues upon assuming the title of House Courtesan. As it turned out, applicants lined up from around the block.

Translation:

To teach at a university nowadays you have to sell your professional integrity in return for meaningless respectability. Turns out, this is attractive to many people.

Something we were taught in 4th fucking grade: SIMPLIFY. I know he's trying to sound pretentious, but it loses what little humor it has when the message disappears. Not that I agree with the message anyway.

 

[Moonbeam]

I would not last 5 minutes in a nursing job, screw that, I would be out of there.

As much as the feminist movement wishes to deny it, there are physical and physiological differences in how men and women handle different jobs.

I took today off to go to the doctors office for some test. One of those test was some blood work. After the lady finished drawing my blood, a few seconds later I passed out. The next thing I remember is waking up on the floor surrounded by a bunch of women nurses.

As I have said before, I fully support womens rights in the workplace. Women should be paid just as much as a man for the same job duties.

Men do some jobs better then women, women do some jobs better then men. I think it is foolish for feminist to think otherwise.

For jobs that men and women preform equally, then the pay should be equal.

That's great, you big pussy.

 

[Texashiker]

M: They do and if a woman applies and gets the job she should get equal pay for it. People have a right to choice of job. That's what the job market is all about, pricing a job sufficiently to attract a sufficient number of folk qualified to do it.

Show me a feminist article that complained about women loggers making less then men, how about construction, drilling,,,, or any other physically demanding job.

M: Aren't qualified women now going to be allowed to take part in combat in the US military? The claim was they were being denied the opportunity to achieve the same level of prestige as men were for promotions.

Yes, and women serving in the military to the same level of men is long overdue.

Women should have been drafted during the vietnam conflict just like men.

Equal pay for equal work, and also equal sacrifice in all parts of society.

Now were getting somewhere. Once you lose your requirement of shitty jobs & working your way up to executive positions we will be on the same page.

How about equal sacrifice in the service of society?

Equal pay and equal rights, but women are not required to register for the draft.

 

[werepossum]

That was incredibly pretentious and contained amazingly little content. I do hope however that no schools are actually using Howard Zinn's books to teach history, unless it's a one-day lesson in "this is what alternative viewpoints are like".

This, exactly.

 

[werepossum]

Now were getting somewhere. Once you lose your requirement of shitty jobs & working your way up to executive positions we will be on the same page.

Not saying I am the only C level exec in the thread. But I assure you most C level execs are not in that position because they started off cleaning the office or in the mailroom.

Unless you are self made, you would be hard pressed to get a CEO job without at least a masters. definetly wont get Fortune 1000 CEO work without a masters. Unless it was a company you founded.

It's fair to say though that most CEOs start off at entry level positions, if not the dirtiest jobs in the company. That most do not work themselves up from janitor does not mean that one graduates with his masters and accepts whichever CEO job he most fancies.

I'm all for requiring CEOs to spend a little time doing every job in the company, but lets not pretend that sweeping the floor trains one to be a CEO or that hard work is the only or even main necessary qualification.

 

[berzerker60]

That was incredibly pretentious and contained amazingly little content. I do hope however that no schools are actually using Howard Zinn's books to teach history, unless it's a one-day lesson in "this is what alternative viewpoints are like".

You could do a lot worse that Zinn, actually. His facts and interpretations are all pretty mainstream among historians. He plays his politics on his sleeve, which is arguably a lot better for students than having textbooks that sweep aside the dark side of American history and pretend to be objective and neutral. History is always interpretations and narratives built from evidence, and Zinn's arguments might not be the most balanced, but I think there's at least as much to be gained as lost, and the alternative is very often just as unbalanced without being open enough about it for students to learn to think for themselves about the issues. It's not like he leaves out the names and dates you'll need for standardized tests, he just adds in a lot of others that aren't as widely known.

Here's a much better article about Zinn in The New Republic, and one that's still critical of him, but for better reasons: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112574/howard-zinns-influential-mutilations-american-history

 

[lotus503]

It's fair to say though that most CEOs start off at entry level positions, if not the dirtiest jobs in the company. That most do not work themselves up from janitor does not mean that one graduates with his masters and accepts whichever CEO job he most fancies.

I'm all for requiring CEOs to spend a little time doing every job in the company, but lets not pretend that sweeping the floor trains one to be a CEO or that hard work is the only or even main necessary qualification.

I don't think it's fair to say most CEOs start off in entry level positions.

I think most start off at least in mid management from school.

I do agree good CEOs have a good grasp of other positions in the company.