hmm. i think that feminism remains a good idea. the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously. it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit. i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past. this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough. it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl. perhaps it means that we wont always be president. it sucks, im sorry. but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms ... im way off topic and so im going to bed
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited July 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--confused!+Jul 14 2003, 10:43 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (confused! @ Jul 14 2003, 10:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> hmm. i think that feminism remains a good idea. the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously. it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit. i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past. this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough. it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl. perhaps it means that we wont always be president. it sucks, im sorry. but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms ... im way off topic and so im going to bed <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is an attitude that I'm really sick and tired of hearing (no offense to you of course <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> )
I have been taught all my life to feel guilty for being a white male. I never did anything wrong, and I'll be damned if I'm going to feel guilty for my sex or my skin color just because people who looked similar to me did horrible things in the past. You don't inherit responsibilty from your ancestors. You are soley responsible for your own actions. Wake up, and stop apologizing!
<!--QuoteBegin--confused!+Jul 14 2003, 10:43 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (confused! @ Jul 14 2003, 10:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> hmm. i think that feminism remains a good idea. the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously. it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit. i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past. this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough. it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl. perhaps it means that we wont always be president. it sucks, im sorry. but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms ... im way off topic and so im going to bed <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Affirmative action (I'm assuming that's what your referring to) is racist/sexist in and of itself because it commands that minorites get preferential, and in some cases, unfair benefits. It's good in theory and some races were being neglected in the education and job system but now qualified people of all races are losing opprotunities to randomly selected margins. As soon as that college meets the 15% quota the next african-american kid that applies won't get the extra points despite being more qualified than the ones who applied before him/her.
Not to mention that it's a LAW saying that someone NEEDS help because of their race which is just ridiculous. Anti-discrimination laws have been effect for years, you can't be fired because you are black, pregnant, ****, mentally handicapped, a communist, etc. so there was no need for this law. In my opinion it just perpetuates negative stereotypes.
The thing with laws and the like is they are a pendulum. When you have it all the way to the left (Oppression) it has been inevitable that it starts to be pushed right. However, when pushed right it doesn't STOP in the middle and it carries on. So what happens now that the original oppressed group starts to become the dominant group (as the pendulum swings further from the middle). Now the original group are beginning to become the new oppressed group.
This is occuring with feminism right at the moment. The ironic thing is exactly what has been posted by Majin in many of the more physical things. Although the PC patrol has tried to ram home all manner of equality crap, it IS a fact that men have a higher amount of muscle than women (which has an obvious effect). In order to allow women into the army and police they had to lower the normal physical standards. In effect making things unequal to make them equal.
The odd thing is, nobody really notices this at all. It is for the moment normal, but the real question is how far will the pendulum keep going right?
<!--QuoteBegin--moultano+Jul 14 2003, 11:00 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Jul 14 2003, 11:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You don't inherit responsibilty from your ancestors. You are soley responsible for your own actions. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> SOOOOOOOOO <b>not</b> the way the Christian God sees it...
They say that men are simple-minded and for that, we are stupid... I think that's wrong. It's our simplicity that makes us smart. We either do something, or we don't.
<!--QuoteBegin--CForrester+Jul 15 2003, 04:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Jul 15 2003, 04:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->They say that men are simple-minded and for that, we are stupid... I think that's wrong. It's our simplicity that makes us smart. We either do something, or we don't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I heard that while intelligence is on average a bit higher for women, the chance for genius on their part is far lower. The gene for genius is tied to the X-chromosome, and in the case of women, both chromosomes need to carry the gene. So, while being a male genius amounts to winning the jackpot in the lottery, being a female genius amounts to winning the jacpot twice in a row. I am no expert on this field, and this is just some piece of information dragged from my memory, so I may be wrong. Treat it as a rumor if you must quote me.
assume you are correct and that genius is in the x-chrom. That would mean that if a male genius married a female who did not carry genius genetic material, they could not have genius children, male or female. The male would pass a y to any male and there is no genius genetic material to pass on from the mother. The female would then obviously carry the material but unless it is dominant, and by the way you describe it I would say it is recessive, the female would only possess half the necessary amount. (remember that all men with x-chrom genetic defects/advantages will have the effects, dominant or recessive)
Being the son of a divorced woman, you'll all have to excuse me not proclaiming sobbing understanding for your cries about how "the pendulum isn't stopping" or affirmative actions being "sexist and racist".
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>. We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon.
<!--QuoteBegin--Gwahir+Jul 15 2003, 07:23 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Gwahir @ Jul 15 2003, 07:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> assume you are correct and that genius is in the x-chrom. That would mean that if a male genius married a female who did not carry genius genetic material, they could not have genius children, male or female. The male would pass a y to any male and there is no genius genetic material to pass on from the mother. The female would then obviously carry the material but unless it is dominant, and by the way you describe it I would say it is recessive, the female would only possess half the necessary amount. (remember that all men with x-chrom genetic defects/advantages will have the effects, dominant or recessive) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Then there's also the possibility of mutation, which is how genius usually surfaces, isn't it?
<!--QuoteBegin--Nemesis Zero+Jul 15 2003, 12:43 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jul 15 2003, 12:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Being the son of a divorced woman, you'll all have to excuse me not proclaiming sobbing understanding for your cries about how "the pendulum isn't stopping" or affirmative actions being "sexist and racist".
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>. We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> But the systamatic promotion of people based solely on their race isn't the answer. Racism/sexism is a subjective problem so making objective laws to deal with it isn't the answer. Everyone cries foul at women and minorites making less than white males but will any of them say "I won't buy any products from a company that isn't run by a black man or a women"? Obviously not since that person has just elminated themselves from 80% of the market. PC activist have an easy time of organizing protest but will any of them give up any real comforts to make a difference? It isn't very likely.
I think affrimitive action laws and welfare propegation just leads to short term solutions to a very long term problem. It's easy to say were giving people hope and jobs today, but will it really change anything in 30 years?
Would women and minorites just quit if there was no affirmitave action to propel them forward? Of course not if anything they would strive harder to over come the oppresion placed on them. If no companies were hiring women eventually someone somewhere would have the idea to make a company that hires ONLY women and since they would probably have been struggling to make a living it would most likely be a more succesful company than a male dominated one. But scenerios like that aren't possible with laws that stem from racist/sexist views of people and it will just continue to propagate a self-defeating attitude.
edit: I presented the argument in general statements, I of course realize there are people who benefit from welfare and affirmitave action but I still believe it isn't a good solution to the problem.
Without getting too inflamatory, feminists aren't seeking equal treatment, they're seeking preferential treatment. In America at least, many on the left seek to unite women, minorities and homosexuals in a great struggle against the ultimate evil, the white heterosexual male. Part of the movement is in obtaining a license to 'overkill' as Bernie Goldberg describes in his (amazing :-) ) book, Bias.
Its a simple process: 1. Claim oppression (usually legitimate) 2. Seek government services or cultural change to boost equality. (Again, legitimate) 3. Push for preferential treatment to make up for past oppression. (Not good).
If you look at modern history, most minority groups (again, I'm talking about America) have followed this cycle. First, we dealt with racism and segregation. Then the women's movement. Now we face a homosexual movement. Minorities and women have demonstrated the pattern. I'm guessing the New Oppressed will continue the trend.
But on the issues of feminism, this is all I will say: Radical Feminists suck. Their mistake is assuming that a life outside the home is superior to life inside the home.
On the issue of gender: Genders are different but equal. Men are superior in many physiological respects, but I beleive women to be superior in mental facilities and emotional facilities.
I'm also hoping this topic isn't nuked, since it IS pretty much discussion. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I do too
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But the systamatic promotion of people based solely on their race isn't the answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You make it sound as if rows and rows of inept black women were put into management positions while brilliant white men were left on the streets. Affirmative actions, which I do by the way not agree with in all cases, are very limited in their effects, we should always keep that in mind while discussing the issue.
Also, I'm not at all a friend of political correctness; arguing its point with me is thus not really necessary.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Would women and minorites just quit if there was no affirmitave action to propel them forward? Of course not if anything they would strive harder to over come the oppresion placed on them. If no companies were hiring women eventually someone somewhere would have the idea to make a company that hires ONLY women and since they would probably have been struggling to make a living it would most likely be a more succesful company than a male dominated one. But scenerios like that aren't possible with laws that stem from racist/sexist views of people and it will just continue to propagate a self-defeating attitude.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK then. The emancipation movement can be traced back into the 19th century. Tell me why there are no female-only megacorps around. Affirmative Actions are used best when they open the basic means of gaining qualification - most notably higher education - to minorities (I always shudder when applying that word on women) that are objectively shunned by widely present biases. If two applicants with the same qualifications try to get on a college, the one who's part of the minority should be preferred. Is that unfair to the other applicant? Yes, but speaking as someone who's in the danger of this exact situation in the nearer future, this very minute unfairness is - compared to the big issues the member of the minority has to deal with due to the bias - acceptable. In the worst case, you can always apply next term. There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.
Someone brought the '20 points' example up - it should be mentioned that this rule was nixed by the Supreme Court.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think affrimitive action laws and welfare propegation just leads to short term solutions to a very long term problem. It's easy to say were giving people hope and jobs today, but will it really change anything in 30 years?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The aim of AAs is to allow more members of minorities to ascend into higher social positions, thus effectively wearing the current social segregation many western countries are in down. Knowing members of other ethnicies is still the best way of ending ethnic biases - or at least removing their hostile aspects. Thus, I see a <i>very</i> long term benefit of the idea - whether the actual actions will lead to this outcome is a different question altogether.
Once again, I, too, am sceptical towards big parts of affirmative legislation, but I believe that the general bashing of anything trying to promote members of ethnicies at social disadvantages just opens the door for a new, more sophisticated racism: The jealousy of the rich.
Well I would have liked you to comment on the point in my thread about people being unwilling to give up any personal comforts to make a real change. Also refer to my edit, I clearly stated that I was using general arguments and that AA works in some instances. And yes the point system was nixed by the supreme court and it is now replaced by a percentage margin system, the difference? None at the moment.
Like I said racism/sexism is a subjective problem, it is because of the people not the system. So to really make a difference you have to change the way people think. It is hard but not impossible and if there is one admirable point in the public school system (I know I know blasphemy) is that it is actually indoctrinating kids with the idea of diversity being a good thing. There are some open minded youngin's out there, granted they are dumb as boards, but open minded.
edit: nevermind the first parapgrah as you stated you don't like the PC people either : )
<!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Jul 15 2003, 07:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Jul 15 2003, 07:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Like I said racism/sexism is a subjective problem, it is because of the people not the system. So to really make a difference you have to change the way people think. It is hard but not impossible and if there is one admirable point in the public school system (I know I know blasphemy) is that it is actually indoctrinating kids with the idea of diversity being a good thing. There are some open minded youngin's out there, granted they are dumb as boards, but open minded. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, but the schools effort only reaches those already at least ambivalent to the issue. Let me give you an example from Germany:
We've currently got big troubles integrating Russians with German ancestors who re-immigrated. Especially in Eastern Germany, there's lots of resentiments against them, ironically although the biggest part of them is in the western part. Now, the school system is largely the same, yet, I experienced a lot more pupils with openly racist opinions over in Saxony (eastern Ger), than in my last school, where we had a few immigrants in the classes.
This is partly what the idea of Affirmative Actions is based on: If you're spending your evenings with friends from a different ethnic group, you'll have a harder time having resentiments towards that group. Ensure that ethnicies which experience malovelent biases are represented acceptably strongly in all (i.e.: also the higher) social areas, and you'll ensure that the public opinion slowly drops the biases: You can only hate what you don't know.
As I said, it's a nice idea, if it only was put through correctly.
I'd have to agree, ethnic diveresty in schools is a good idea but it often comes with bad side effects. The hardest part is the initial phase when integration is just starting, but as history dictates it always leads to better times.
One of the many things I admire about places like Los Angeles (my home city : P ) is that it is a metling pot for cultures and one of the quickest ways to null a lot of racist attitudes is to null the shock factor and thus lessening xenophobia.
Anyhoo in my opinion racism is slowly diminishing at large. Global communications and intereactions are shrinking our world and soon one country will be just as accessible as another.
Sexism on the other hand is a bigger issue, at least in the states. With the media (whom I usually don't blame for anything) pandering out idiotic ideals of what people should look like. There are less and less unnatractive people on TV and in magazines, and the people who get put on are more and more extreme in their aesthetic apperance. I for one believe the media has little affect on people when they have good parenting but unfortunatly in a lot of the homes here that isn't the case and this shallow media image has a damaging affect on kids.
Now you'd say it hasn't been that big of a problem and I'd agre, but I say it's been getting worse the last few years and for whatever reason it is starting to bug me.
I dissagree with you that its a melting pot....I dont believe any part of America is considered a "melting pot", but rather a "salad bowl"...BTW : I'm serious about the salad bowl. <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--lolfighter+Jul 15 2003, 11:57 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (lolfighter @ Jul 15 2003, 11:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--CForrester+Jul 15 2003, 04:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Jul 15 2003, 04:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->They say that men are simple-minded and for that, we are stupid... I think that's wrong. It's our simplicity that makes us smart. We either do something, or we don't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I heard that while intelligence is on average a bit higher for women, the chance for genius on their part is far lower. The gene for genius is tied to the X-chromosome, and in the case of women, both chromosomes need to carry the gene. So, while being a male genius amounts to winning the jackpot in the lottery, being a female genius amounts to winning the jacpot twice in a row. I am no expert on this field, and this is just some piece of information dragged from my memory, so I may be wrong. Treat it as a rumor if you must quote me. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Not exactly as in genetics there are dominant and recessive genes. If 1 X chromosone has a dominant genius trait and the other has a recessive "stupidty" trait then the only trait that shows up would be the dominant trait but the recessive trait can still be passed on to offspring.
<!--QuoteBegin--Mullet+Jul 15 2003, 03:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mullet @ Jul 15 2003, 03:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I dissagree with you that its a melting pot....I dont believe any part of America is considered a "melting pot", but rather a "salad bowl"...BTW : I'm serious about the salad bowl. <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What with America turning the rest of the world into identikit McDonalds & Starbucks hosts I don't think you could rightly call any part of it a "salad bowl". Perhaps a salad bowl mixed filled with vegetables & fruit run through a blender...
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin--Nemesis Zero+Jul 15 2003, 03:03 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jul 15 2003, 03:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Jul 15 2003, 07:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Jul 15 2003, 07:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Like I said racism/sexism is a subjective problem, it is because of the people not the system. So to really make a difference you have to change the way people think. It is hard but not impossible and if there is one admirable point in the public school system (I know I know blasphemy) is that it is actually indoctrinating kids with the idea of diversity being a good thing. There are some open minded youngin's out there, granted they are dumb as boards, but open minded. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, but the schools effort only reaches those already at least ambivalent to the issue. Let me give you an example from Germany:
We've currently got big troubles integrating Russians with German ancestors who re-immigrated. Especially in Eastern Germany, there's lots of resentiments against them, ironically although the biggest part of them is in the western part. Now, the school system is largely the same, yet, I experienced a lot more pupils with openly racist opinions over in Saxony (eastern Ger), than in my last school, where we had a few immigrants in the classes.
This is partly what the idea of Affirmative Actions is based on: If you're spending your evenings with friends from a different ethnic group, you'll have a harder time having resentiments towards that group. Ensure that ethnicies which experience malovelent biases are represented acceptably strongly in all (i.e.: also the higher) social areas, and you'll ensure that the public opinion slowly drops the biases: You can only hate what you don't know.
As I said, it's a nice idea, if it only was put through correctly. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> In my experience the affirmative action policies of colleges <b>create</b> more racism than they compensate for. I know several people, formerly very logical, sane, and progessive, who started making racist jokes when less qualified minority applicants were accepted to schools they were denied from. That's a significant loss of good minds there.
There is this great myth that the reason there is still an economic disparity in America has something to do with race. It's horribly mistaken. The reason that there is still economic disparity is <b>economics</b>. From everything that I've seen, a black guy and a white guy with families in the same income group have exactly the same opportunity. A black guy from the ghetto and a middle class white guy do not. For some reason people keep comparing the latter. If we wan't to deal with this we need to do something, not about racism, but about poverty and the decay of the inner cities.
The stated desire (and the reason they are still constitutional) of affirmative action policies is to promote diversity. What the programs fail to realise is that diversity (or even culture) has nothing to do with race. The black guys in my dorm this year didn't add any diversity to the floor in any more than a visual way. The reason is because they are all from the same economic backgound as the rest of us. They were brought up in the same way, they have the same interests and general political opinions as a result.
If we want to make an affirmative action policy that works, that will be valid for the long term, that will truly lift people out of the ghettos, and that won't cause widespread racism, that will create real diversity in our colleges, we need to base it on the root of the problem: <b>economics</b>. If Colleges would strive to get students from different economic backgrounds and eliminate race from the equation altogether, we would have a workable system.
OH come on, you're all taking this WAY too seriously. Sure, he may have touched a few children, but he has brought happiness to soooooo many lives, let's learn not to hate
<!--QuoteBegin--moultano+Jul 15 2003, 10:55 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Jul 15 2003, 10:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> From everything that I've seen, a black guy and a white guy with families in the same income group have exactly the same opportunity. A black guy from the ghetto and a middle class white guy do not. For some reason people keep comparing the latter. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's because the statistic majority of both ethnics are compared. Sadly, there's more blacks in lower than in the middle class.
As for the rest of your points, I'd like to quote myself: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And leave it at that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
DuBERS, you'll notice your post is missing. If you wish to complain about a lock, contact the locking admin.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin--Nemesis Zero+Jul 15 2003, 06:10 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jul 15 2003, 06:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for the rest of your points, I'd like to quote myself: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And leave it at that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> gg <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Nemesis Zero+Jul 15 2003, 12:43 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jul 15 2003, 12:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Being the son of a divorced woman, you'll all have to excuse me not proclaiming sobbing understanding for your cries about how "the pendulum isn't stopping" or affirmative actions being "sexist and racist".
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>. We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats not true, when you take what industry, education level, and exsperience into acount its not 75%. The latest study I read where they didn't take all those into account had it at women making 83% anyways. I doubt the thing about blacks even more.
<!--QuoteBegin--Salty+Jul 15 2003, 11:28 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Salty @ Jul 15 2003, 11:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Thats not true, when you take what industry, education level, and exsperience into acount its not 75%. The latest study I read where they didn't take all those into account had it at women making 83% anyways. I doubt the thing about blacks even more. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> A full 8% less injustice? I'll have to rewrite all my posts...
Note that I was talking about a statistic from Germany here. No idea about the American figures. The Black/White study is credible as far as I know, though. It's late, so allow me to search the sourceregister of the book I got it from tomorrow.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm really not sure women's wages will ever be at the same level as men's simply because childbirth tends to derail careers, at least a little. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The statistic compares the effective payment of people in the same positions. If you're, for example, manager for Daimler Chrysler and your wife has the same position, she'll get less money for the exact same work. Childbirth does thus not factor in the figure.
For the last time, the mods/admins are discussing (ironic, isn't it?) its future, but even if the decision was positive, we'd be insane to open yet another forum during or shortly after 2.0s release.
Comments
i think that feminism remains a good idea.
the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously.
it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit.
i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them
as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past.
this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough.
it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl.
perhaps it means that we wont always be president.
it sucks, im sorry.
but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms
...
im way off topic and so im going to bed
i think that feminism remains a good idea.
the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously.
it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit.
i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them
as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past.
this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough.
it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl.
perhaps it means that we wont always be president.
it sucks, im sorry.
but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms
...
im way off topic and so im going to bed <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is an attitude that I'm really sick and tired of hearing (no offense to you of course <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> )
I have been taught all my life to feel guilty for being a white male. I never did anything wrong, and I'll be damned if I'm going to feel guilty for my sex or my skin color just because people who looked similar to me did horrible things in the past. You don't inherit responsibilty from your ancestors. You are soley responsible for your own actions. Wake up, and stop apologizing!
i think that feminism remains a good idea.
the fact is that women and men are diffferent, much like teh wheel and axle analogy previously.
it is also true that women have been opressed by men for a good bit.
i, as a white male, feel that i should do something that helps them
as well the other groups that people like me have downtrodden in the past.
this does mean that some of us white males are not going to get into the colege we wanted to, tough.
it means that perhaps that summer job gets taken by a girl.
perhaps it means that we wont always be president.
it sucks, im sorry.
but it makes you and those you help better people so keep checking the little box nex to white amle on all your forms
...
im way off topic and so im going to bed <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Affirmative action (I'm assuming that's what your referring to) is racist/sexist in and of itself because it commands that minorites get preferential, and in some cases, unfair benefits. It's good in theory and some races were being neglected in the education and job system but now qualified people of all races are losing opprotunities to randomly selected margins. As soon as that college meets the 15% quota the next african-american kid that applies won't get the extra points despite being more qualified than the ones who applied before him/her.
Not to mention that it's a LAW saying that someone NEEDS help because of their race which is just ridiculous. Anti-discrimination laws have been effect for years, you can't be fired because you are black, pregnant, ****, mentally handicapped, a communist, etc. so there was no need for this law. In my opinion it just perpetuates negative stereotypes.
This is occuring with feminism right at the moment. The ironic thing is exactly what has been posted by Majin in many of the more physical things. Although the PC patrol has tried to ram home all manner of equality crap, it IS a fact that men have a higher amount of muscle than women (which has an obvious effect). In order to allow women into the army and police they had to lower the normal physical standards. In effect making things unequal to make them equal.
The odd thing is, nobody really notices this at all. It is for the moment normal, but the real question is how far will the pendulum keep going right?
SOOOOOOOOO <b>not</b> the way the Christian God sees it...
As for affirmitive action it is racist.
Perfect double 800s on sat: 12 points.
Having your skin reflect light diffrently: 20 points.
I heard that while intelligence is on average a bit higher for women, the chance for genius on their part is far lower. The gene for genius is tied to the X-chromosome, and in the case of women, both chromosomes need to carry the gene. So, while being a male genius amounts to winning the jackpot in the lottery, being a female genius amounts to winning the jacpot twice in a row. I am no expert on this field, and this is just some piece of information dragged from my memory, so I may be wrong. Treat it as a rumor if you must quote me.
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>.
We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon.
Then there's also the possibility of mutation, which is how genius usually surfaces, isn't it?
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>.
We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But the systamatic promotion of people based solely on their race isn't the answer. Racism/sexism is a subjective problem so making objective laws to deal with it isn't the answer. Everyone cries foul at women and minorites making less than white males but will any of them say "I won't buy any products from a company that isn't run by a black man or a women"? Obviously not since that person has just elminated themselves from 80% of the market. PC activist have an easy time of organizing protest but will any of them give up any real comforts to make a difference? It isn't very likely.
I think affrimitive action laws and welfare propegation just leads to short term solutions to a very long term problem. It's easy to say were giving people hope and jobs today, but will it really change anything in 30 years?
Would women and minorites just quit if there was no affirmitave action to propel them forward? Of course not if anything they would strive harder to over come the oppresion placed on them. If no companies were hiring women eventually someone somewhere would have the idea to make a company that hires ONLY women and since they would probably have been struggling to make a living it would most likely be a more succesful company than a male dominated one. But scenerios like that aren't possible with laws that stem from racist/sexist views of people and it will just continue to propagate a self-defeating attitude.
edit: I presented the argument in general statements, I of course realize there are people who benefit from welfare and affirmitave action but I still believe it isn't a good solution to the problem.
Without getting too inflamatory, feminists aren't seeking equal treatment, they're seeking preferential treatment. In America at least, many on the left seek to unite women, minorities and homosexuals in a great struggle against the ultimate evil, the white heterosexual male. Part of the movement is in obtaining a license to 'overkill' as Bernie Goldberg describes in his (amazing :-) ) book, Bias.
Its a simple process:
1. Claim oppression (usually legitimate)
2. Seek government services or cultural change to boost equality. (Again, legitimate)
3. Push for preferential treatment to make up for past oppression. (Not good).
If you look at modern history, most minority groups (again, I'm talking about America) have followed this cycle. First, we dealt with racism and segregation. Then the women's movement. Now we face a homosexual movement. Minorities and women have demonstrated the pattern. I'm guessing the New Oppressed will continue the trend.
But on the issues of feminism, this is all I will say:
Radical Feminists suck. Their mistake is assuming that a life outside the home is superior to life inside the home.
On the issue of gender:
Genders are different but equal. Men are superior in many physiological respects, but I beleive women to be superior in mental facilities and emotional facilities.
I'm also hoping this topic isn't nuked, since it IS pretty much discussion. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do too
and you make an excellent point in your quote
You make it sound as if rows and rows of inept black women were put into management positions while brilliant white men were left on the streets. Affirmative actions, which I do by the way not agree with in all cases, are very limited in their effects, we should always keep that in mind while discussing the issue.
Also, I'm not at all a friend of political correctness; arguing its point with me is thus not really necessary.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Would women and minorites just quit if there was no affirmitave action to propel them forward? Of course not if anything they would strive harder to over come the oppresion placed on them. If no companies were hiring women eventually someone somewhere would have the idea to make a company that hires ONLY women and since they would probably have been struggling to make a living it would most likely be a more succesful company than a male dominated one. But scenerios like that aren't possible with laws that stem from racist/sexist views of people and it will just continue to propagate a self-defeating attitude.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK then. The emancipation movement can be traced back into the 19th century. Tell me why there are no female-only megacorps around.
Affirmative Actions are used best when they open the basic means of gaining qualification - most notably higher education - to minorities (I always shudder when applying that word on women) that are objectively shunned by widely present biases. If two applicants with the same qualifications try to get on a college, the one who's part of the minority should be preferred. Is that unfair to the other applicant? Yes, but speaking as someone who's in the danger of this exact situation in the nearer future, this very minute unfairness is - compared to the big issues the member of the minority has to deal with due to the bias - acceptable. In the worst case, you can always apply next term. There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.
Someone brought the '20 points' example up - it should be mentioned that this rule was nixed by the Supreme Court.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think affrimitive action laws and welfare propegation just leads to short term solutions to a very long term problem. It's easy to say were giving people hope and jobs today, but will it really change anything in 30 years?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The aim of AAs is to allow more members of minorities to ascend into higher social positions, thus effectively wearing the current social segregation many western countries are in down. Knowing members of other ethnicies is still the best way of ending ethnic biases - or at least removing their hostile aspects.
Thus, I see a <i>very</i> long term benefit of the idea - whether the actual actions will lead to this outcome is a different question altogether.
Once again, I, too, am sceptical towards big parts of affirmative legislation, but I believe that the general bashing of anything trying to promote members of ethnicies at social disadvantages just opens the door for a new, more sophisticated racism: The jealousy of the rich.
Like I said racism/sexism is a subjective problem, it is because of the people not the system. So to really make a difference you have to change the way people think. It is hard but not impossible and if there is one admirable point in the public school system (I know I know blasphemy) is that it is actually indoctrinating kids with the idea of diversity being a good thing. There are some open minded youngin's out there, granted they are dumb as boards, but open minded.
edit: nevermind the first parapgrah as you stated you don't like the PC people either : )
Yes, but the schools effort only reaches those already at least ambivalent to the issue. Let me give you an example from Germany:
We've currently got big troubles integrating Russians with German ancestors who re-immigrated. Especially in Eastern Germany, there's lots of resentiments against them, ironically although the biggest part of them is in the western part. Now, the school system is largely the same, yet, I experienced a lot more pupils with openly racist opinions over in Saxony (eastern Ger), than in my last school, where we had a few immigrants in the classes.
This is partly what the idea of Affirmative Actions is based on: If you're spending your evenings with friends from a different ethnic group, you'll have a harder time having resentiments towards that group. Ensure that ethnicies which experience malovelent biases are represented acceptably strongly in all (i.e.: also the higher) social areas, and you'll ensure that the public opinion slowly drops the biases: You can only hate what you don't know.
As I said, it's a nice idea, if it only was put through correctly.
One of the many things I admire about places like Los Angeles (my home city : P ) is that it is a metling pot for cultures and one of the quickest ways to null a lot of racist attitudes is to null the shock factor and thus lessening xenophobia.
Anyhoo in my opinion racism is slowly diminishing at large. Global communications and intereactions are shrinking our world and soon one country will be just as accessible as another.
Sexism on the other hand is a bigger issue, at least in the states. With the media (whom I usually don't blame for anything) pandering out idiotic ideals of what people should look like. There are less and less unnatractive people on TV and in magazines, and the people who get put on are more and more extreme in their aesthetic apperance. I for one believe the media has little affect on people when they have good parenting but unfortunatly in a lot of the homes here that isn't the case and this shallow media image has a damaging affect on kids.
Now you'd say it hasn't been that big of a problem and I'd agre, but I say it's been getting worse the last few years and for whatever reason it is starting to bug me.
I heard that while intelligence is on average a bit higher for women, the chance for genius on their part is far lower. The gene for genius is tied to the X-chromosome, and in the case of women, both chromosomes need to carry the gene. So, while being a male genius amounts to winning the jackpot in the lottery, being a female genius amounts to winning the jacpot twice in a row. I am no expert on this field, and this is just some piece of information dragged from my memory, so I may be wrong. Treat it as a rumor if you must quote me. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not exactly as in genetics there are dominant and recessive genes. If 1 X chromosone has a dominant genius trait and the other has a recessive "stupidty" trait then the only trait that shows up would be the dominant trait but the recessive trait can still be passed on to offspring.
What with America turning the rest of the world into identikit McDonalds & Starbucks hosts I don't think you could rightly call any part of it a "salad bowl". Perhaps a salad bowl mixed filled with vegetables & fruit run through a blender...
Yes, but the schools effort only reaches those already at least ambivalent to the issue. Let me give you an example from Germany:
We've currently got big troubles integrating Russians with German ancestors who re-immigrated. Especially in Eastern Germany, there's lots of resentiments against them, ironically although the biggest part of them is in the western part. Now, the school system is largely the same, yet, I experienced a lot more pupils with openly racist opinions over in Saxony (eastern Ger), than in my last school, where we had a few immigrants in the classes.
This is partly what the idea of Affirmative Actions is based on: If you're spending your evenings with friends from a different ethnic group, you'll have a harder time having resentiments towards that group. Ensure that ethnicies which experience malovelent biases are represented acceptably strongly in all (i.e.: also the higher) social areas, and you'll ensure that the public opinion slowly drops the biases: You can only hate what you don't know.
As I said, it's a nice idea, if it only was put through correctly. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my experience the affirmative action policies of colleges <b>create</b> more racism than they compensate for. I know several people, formerly very logical, sane, and progessive, who started making racist jokes when less qualified minority applicants were accepted to schools they were denied from. That's a significant loss of good minds there.
There is this great myth that the reason there is still an economic disparity in America has something to do with race. It's horribly mistaken. The reason that there is still economic disparity is <b>economics</b>. From everything that I've seen, a black guy and a white guy with families in the same income group have exactly the same opportunity. A black guy from the ghetto and a middle class white guy do not. For some reason people keep comparing the latter. If we wan't to deal with this we need to do something, not about racism, but about poverty and the decay of the inner cities.
The stated desire (and the reason they are still constitutional) of affirmative action policies is to promote diversity. What the programs fail to realise is that diversity (or even culture) has nothing to do with race. The black guys in my dorm this year didn't add any diversity to the floor in any more than a visual way. The reason is because they are all from the same economic backgound as the rest of us. They were brought up in the same way, they have the same interests and general political opinions as a result.
If we want to make an affirmative action policy that works, that will be valid for the long term, that will truly lift people out of the ghettos, and that won't cause widespread racism, that will create real diversity in our colleges, we need to base it on the root of the problem: <b>economics</b>. If Colleges would strive to get students from different economic backgrounds and eliminate race from the equation altogether, we would have a workable system.
It's because the statistic majority of both ethnics are compared. Sadly, there's more blacks in lower than in the middle class.
As for the rest of your points, I'd like to quote myself:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And leave it at that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
DuBERS, you'll notice your post is missing. If you wish to complain about a lock, contact the locking admin.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are arguably preferrable models - I'd prefer a system that allows people of weaker social status to prevail independently from ethnic background - but just because the current system isn't perfect doesn't mean it isn't doing more good than bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And leave it at that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
gg <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Right <i>now</i>, women tend to make 75% of the wages a similiarily qualified man brings home. In the US, the statistically average difference between a black and a white persons yearly income lies around 60%. It <i>hasn't changed since the abolition of slavery</i>.
We aren't responsible for the racism or sexism of our ancestor, but it's our obligation to put an end to its remnants, and believe me, that job won't be done anytime soon. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats not true, when you take what industry, education level, and exsperience into acount its not 75%. The latest study I read where they didn't take all those into account had it at women making 83% anyways. I doubt the thing about blacks even more.
A full 8% less injustice? I'll have to rewrite all my posts...
Note that I was talking about a statistic from Germany here. No idea about the American figures. The Black/White study is credible as far as I know, though. It's late, so allow me to search the sourceregister of the book I got it from tomorrow.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm really not sure women's wages will ever be at the same level as men's simply because childbirth tends to derail careers, at least a little. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The statistic compares the effective payment of people in the same positions. If you're, for example, manager for Daimler Chrysler and your wife has the same position, she'll get less money for the exact same work.
Childbirth does thus not factor in the figure.
*peers at the discussion forum*