The hidden violence of the socialistic mindset

[mikeymikec]

For solving race issues, we have to pick and choose which we do first and which we do next, and which are not worth solving. Again, we live in a resource constrained world, so you should pick the thing that gives the most return. If you are using resources to solve a social issue, then you would want to go after the thing that gives you the largest fix relative to the investment, then go to the next. The context should be that we are as a society trying to solve our problems, and are doing 1 thing at a time. Many have said that BLM matter is a way of saying black lives matter too, but many examples have shown that large parts of the movement do not feel that way. Ill leave this be though because its very long.

To each their own, but IMO dismissing a movement because you don't agree with everyone who consider themselves to be a part of it means that you won't be part of many movements ever. I personally would dismiss a movement if I felt that the basic reasons for its existence are fundamentally flawed (eg. GG and Zoe Quinn).

The problem is that when you say things like there is not really a gender pay gap issue, you get labeled as a misogynist even if you have data. There are real things effecting women, but its almost impossible to talk about.

If you've noticed I haven't actually debated that point with you because I think it's an impossible point to debate on a general societal basis. I'm absolutely sure that there are some racist/sexist motherfuckers out there to work for and that they treat some people with an undue lack of respect, but if one takes say the healthcare sector for example, let's say 3 out of 12 hospitals are run by racists/sexists and that results in a disparity in salaries respectively, grinding that up into a statistic about all 12 hospitals doesn't really make much sense. It gets worse if one tries to analyse all the organisations in a society, comparing say 300,000 burger flippers alongside 50,000 surgeons, disparities in pay are not likely to be represented in any meaningful manner. If a problem with an organisation is perceived, so investigate it and get it fixed. If a problem was spotted in a sector in general, that's a more complicated issue and probably would require a different approach.

Thus I would not see any point in labelling you a misogynist if you disagree that there is a gender pay gap, however I worry a bit about the idea of stating "there isn't one" or "there is one" because of the difficulties involved in any sort of general analysis of a modern society. I would bet that the statisticians involved in any previous analyses have laughed all the way to the bank after receiving funding for such an undertaking.

 

[realibrad]

To each their own, but IMO dismissing a movement because you don't agree with everyone who consider themselves to be a part of it means that you won't be part of many movements ever. I personally would dismiss a movement if I felt that the basic reasons for its existence are fundamentally flawed (eg. GG and Zoe Quinn).

For me, BLM is a response to a very real issue. Black people are treated unequally by police in my opinion. I don't disagree with the methods which include the message.

GG is a tricky thing but also resembles BLM in that you have some that can taint or define an entire movement. Honestly, I dont know if its wrong to say that GG is sexist. I think GG, just like BLM is a response to a real thing, not as important as racism, but still a real thing. The problem is that movements dont have a signup sheet, so anyone can say they are part of it.

If you've noticed I haven't actually debated that point with you because I think it's an impossible point to debate on a general societal basis. I'm absolutely sure that there are some racist/sexist motherfuckers out there to work for and that they treat some people with an undue lack of respect, but if one takes say the healthcare sector for example, let's say 3 out of 12 hospitals are run by racists/sexists and that results in a disparity in salaries respectively, grinding that up into a statistic about all 12 hospitals doesn't really make much sense. It gets worse if one tries to analyse all the organisations in a society, comparing say 300,000 burger flippers alongside 50,000 surgeons, disparities in pay are not likely to be represented in any meaningful manner. If a problem with an organisation is perceived, so investigate it and get it fixed. If a problem was spotted in a sector in general, that's a more complicated issue and probably would require a different approach.

Fair enough.

Thus I would not see any point in labelling you a misogynist if you disagree that there is a gender pay gap, however I worry a bit about the idea of stating "there isn't one" or "there is one" because of the difficulties involved in any sort of general analysis of a modern society. I would bet that the statisticians involved in any previous analyses have laughed all the way to the bank after receiving funding for such an undertaking.

No doubt. The sad part here is that people are making policy based off of something that currently is non-falsifiable. The data we do have on the "pay gap" at best shows nothing. There could be an issue, or there may not be.