Men need the Money more than women (Walker signs bill revoking equal wage law)

Rune

Mjölner
Let the war on women continue!

Women have made important and major strides in opportunity, work force engagement and pay in the past half century, but next week's April 17 Equal Pay Day exists for an enduring and legitimate reason. This day symbolically marks how far into the year a woman has to work to make what a man made during the prior calendar year. Yup. That means Jane has to keep working through January, February, March and half of April 2012 in order to bring home the same paycheck that John did in calendar year 2011. Since the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the gap between men's and women's pay (calculated for full-time work) has closed at less than half-a-cent per year. At this rate, we will be "celebrating" this event for fifty more years before the gap closes.


Mr. Grothman and Mr. Walker, like so many of their peers, are nostalgic for a bygone era based on the outdated and onerous-for-all idea of all-male, sole-breadwinner responsibility. Grothman continued: "I think a guy in their first job (sic), maybe because they expect to be a breadwinner someday, may be a little more money-conscious. To attribute everything to a so-called bias in the workplace is just not true." Personally, I'd rather attribute it to ignorance, paternalistic sexism and a blithe denial of modern economies. But, to be fair, I imagine that Mr. Grothman is simply trying to help sex-seeking young guys by making sure they have a "dining budget" to go a-courtin'. Pat Robertson captured the essence of this
to finances this weekend when he instructed Evangelical faithful men to "push forward and your wife will come along." I know, I know, some people don't want to get too feminist-thinky about money and sex and get befuddled by new-fangled ideas of equality and fairness.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/wage-equality_b_1415560.html

Keep the denying the truth, pubs, women are not stupid and I will laugh this November until my eyeballs fall out.
 
You can't believe Robertson said something crazy? I'm more surprised at that than I am at Robertson.
 
It wasn't Robinson. I didn't even watch the video - I know he is crazy. Did you read the article dude?

The video is Robertson, the article talks about what Robertson said.

Pat Robertson captured the essence of this when he instructed Evangelical faithful men to "push forward and your wife will come along." I know, I know, some people don't want to get too feminist-thinky about money and sex and get befuddled by new-fangled ideas of equality and fairness.

And Grothman saying that guys may be more money-conscious... Then attributes an unaccountable motive to him from the author.

The only crazy thing I see said is from Robertson. The Grothman quote is silly, but not "crazy"...
 
The video is Robertson, the article talks about what Robertson said.



And Grothman saying that guys may be more money-conscious... Then attributes an unaccountable motive to him from the author.

The only crazy thing I see said is from Robertson. The Grothman quote is silly, but not "crazy"...

No, you didn't read the article.

Republican state senator Glenn Grothman, a major champion of the charge to repeal the Act, explained to Daily Beast reporter Michelle Goldberg, "You could argue that money is more important for men."

Mr. Grothman and Mr. Walker, like so many of their peers, are nostalgic for a bygone era based on the outdated and onerous-for-all idea of all-male, sole-breadwinner responsibility. Grothman continued: "I think a guy in their first job (sic), maybe because they expect to be a breadwinner someday, may be a little more money-conscious. To attribute everything to a so-called bias in the workplace is just not true."
 
No, you didn't read the article.

Republican state senator Glenn Grothman, a major champion of the charge to repeal the Act, explained to Daily Beast reporter Michelle Goldberg, "You could argue that money is more important for men."

Mr. Grothman and Mr. Walker, like so many of their peers, are nostalgic for a bygone era based on the outdated and onerous-for-all idea of all-male, sole-breadwinner responsibility. Grothman continued: "I think a guy in their first job (sic), maybe because they expect to be a breadwinner someday, may be a little more money-conscious. To attribute everything to a so-called bias in the workplace is just not true."

Again, an unattributable motive given by the author for a silly quote about how men are more money-motivated isn't as crazy as the Robertson thing. Methinks you didn't read my post.
 
Again, an unattributable motive given by the author for a silly quote about how men are more money-motivated isn't as crazy as the Robertson thing. Methinks you didn't read my post.

Ignore the motive given by the author and respond just to senator's comments.
 
Again, an unattributable motive given by the author for a silly quote about how men are more money-motivated isn't as crazy as the Robertson thing. Methinks you didn't read my post.

I can't say if it's as crazy I haven't watched the video. I thought it was pretty crazy that an elected official would make that comment. I still think so. People around here don't talk that way no matter which party they are with. It's freaking crazy. They would be run out of town, I guess. I'm glad I live where I live.
 
I can't say if it's as crazy I haven't watched the video. I thought it was pretty crazy that an elected official would make that comment. I still think so. People around here don't talk that way no matter which party they are with. It's freaking crazy. They would be run out of town, I guess. I'm glad I live where I live.
M'eh. I would say it was far less crazy than the Robertson thing, and yeah I could see it as a bit "crazy". I'm sure it sounded better in his head. I don't think, if he actually ran on that, he'd get much support anywhere though. He's basically saying that men are greedier, the motive portion (the part where the author assigns a motivation he thinks will sound the most evil to the statement) of the article makes it sound worse than it is, IMO.
 
Meh? This senator advance a bill which recinds equaul pay for women, then justifies it with mumbo jumbo.
Walker signed the bill, but there is no war republican war on women?
 
Meh? This senator advance a bill which recinds equaul pay for women, then justifies it with mumbo jumbo.
Walker signed the bill, but there is no war republican war on women?

It didn't rescind the law. Why must you repeat inaccuracies in order to justify support for your opinions?
 
I can't read what this troll posts so I may be getting this all out of context but I was able to see this quote, "Mr. Grothman and Mr. Walker, like so many of their peers, are nostalgic for a bygone era based on the outdated and onerous-for-all idea of all-male, sole-breadwinner responsibility."

Don't a lot of people complain about how expensive everything is today and how they wish they didn't have to have two parents work just to pay their bills? Now I understand women wanting to not be told you can't get an education and you can't get a job but I have to imagine within a family if only one parent had to work and not both to survive financially many would be happy with that.
 
1. it is still illegal to discriminate pay based on gender

2. the law was burdensome, resulting in zero lawsuits filed the entire the law was in effect.

try getting your facts straight before spouting off dune.
 
I can't read what this troll posts so I may be getting this all out of context but I was able to see this quote, "Mr. Grothman and Mr. Walker, like so many of their peers, are nostalgic for a bygone era based on the outdated and onerous-for-all idea of all-male, sole-breadwinner responsibility."

Don't a lot of people complain about how expensive everything is today and how they wish they didn't have to have two parents work just to pay their bills? Now I understand women wanting to not be told you can't get an education and you can't get a job but I have to imagine within a family if only one parent had to work and not both to survive financially many would be happy with that.

Stay ignorant then. It is what you are good at, and this post is a perfect example.
 
Back
Top