** 16-Jan-2021 World View: Women in the workplace
Burner Prime wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 11:42 am
> Women's primary value to society is as wives and mothers bringing
> up the next generation with the emphasis on morals and strength,
> in a cohesive tribal unit.
> Unfortunately due to the 40 year+ feminist psyop, generations have
> been deluded into thinking they have the same skillset as men, and
> most of the time are even more capable than men due to their
> unique vajeen that gives them superpowers.
> I can think of very few women who are capable of leading nations,
> The Iron Lady Thatcher comes to mind. There are capable women with
> high testosterone and masculine thinking, though they are very
> few. I knew female (lesbian) military officers who were very
> capable leaders, and met police officers in the same league. They
> are definitely in the minority though. Instead most women in power
> today rely on their ability to argue, persuade, or manipulate in a
> social context, think Pelosi, The Squad, Sheryl Sandberg,
> ...
You sound bitter, like someone who has recently been dumped.
The rise of women in the workplace has absolutely nothing to do with
feminism or politics or wokeness.
It has to do with technology.
150 years ago, being a housewife was a necessary and full time job. A
woman had to spend the entire day preparing meals, sewing clothes,
scrubbing walls and doors, fetching water from the well, and so forth.
It was a great deal of work, very time-consuming, and very hard work,
and unless a woman was single and unattached, even the thought of
leaving the home long enough to do an outside job was unthinkable,
especially if she had children.
Since WW II, technology has completely changed the life of a wife:
- First, vast areas of new technology in the home has made the
job of a housewife almost trivial, as compared to the 1800s. There
are washing machines, dishwashers, tv dinners, Lysol, vacuum cleaners,
and so forth. There are a million examples I could name, but here's
just one. In the 1800s, if your child's sock developed a hole, the
wife had to spend an hour "darning socks." You don't hear much about
darning socks these days, but it used to be a big part of a woman's
life. Now it's rare (though you can learn how to do it if you do an
internet search). So there are a million examples of things that used
to take up a lot of time, but now take up no time or almost no time.
So a wife has huge amounts of free time available that she didn't have
before, and the obvious thought is to use the free time in an outside
job, and make some more money for the benefit of the whole family.
Feminists claim credit for that, but they had nothing to do with it.
It's technology that has given women the free time to take jobs
outside the home.
- Second, vast areas of new technology in the workplace have made it
possible for women to take jobs that were impossible in the past
because men are taller, stronger and heavier than women. Thus, women
can operate heavy machinery, can drive trucks, can program computers,
and so forth, because of new technologies that do the heavy work.
Once again, feminism has nothing to do with this. It's technology
that has made it possible for women to take jobs that otherwise would
only be available to men, who are taller, stronger and heavier than
women.
There is still a big difference between men and women because of
hormones. You're right that it's rare that a woman can lead a nation.
Women do sometimes lead nations, but that's because they make an
enormous effort.
I'll give an example from software engineering, because that's what
I'm most familiar with.
I've seen women achieve the same accomplishments as male software
engineers, but it's rare. And it's not because women are illogical,
or any nonsense like that. It's because they have other
responsibilities.
Here is a fairly standard scenario in a software engineering group.
It's Monday, and there's a release scheduled for a week from Friday.
There's still a lot of work to be done, so members of the group are
expected to work from early morning to midnight to get the job done.
A man will simply call his wife and tell her he'll be late. A woman
with children is far less likely to be willing to do that. So she
will insist on leaving at 5 pm, while her coworkers continue working.
They will accomplish a lot more than she will, and so they will get
bigger salary increases because of their greater accomplishments.
That's an example of why men have higher salaries than women, for what
is nominally the same job. It isn't the same job, since men are
expected to work a lot more hours than women in many different fields.
I haven't looked at the figures recently, but 20 years ago the stats
were that a salaried man worked an average of 49 hours per week, and a
salaried woman worked 40 hours per week. So salaried men accomplished
a lot more on the job than salaried women, and so they receive higher
salaries, for obvious reasons.
The statistics as I remember them are that women without children got
the same salaries as men, but women with children got less. The
reasons are obvious.
So, women have entered the workplace since the 1800s because of
technology, not because of feminism. But even technology hasn't
overcome a mother's need to prioritize being with the children over
working extra hours. Maybe working at home will even solve even that
problem.