Open letter to Ann Coulter for using R-word

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Hollowway, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. The Reverend

    The Reverend GHETTO KING OF SWAG

    Messages:
    3,457
    Likes Received:
    431
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2010
    Location:
    Arlington, TX
    Okay, now I'm rolling up the sleeves on my Internet Researcher Shirt, and when that happens... Let's just say you don't want to know.

    Actually, never mind. I'm being lazy and copying Wikipedia's references about the motherhood penalty for you. They are published studies, except for a Forbes magazine article that I believe we will both ignore as a valid source.


    1. ^ Budig, Michelle and Paula England. 2001. "The Wage Penalty for Motherhood." American Sociological Review 66(2):204
    2. ^ Anderson, Deborah J., Melissa Binder, and Kate Krause. 2003. "The Motherhood Wage Penalty Revisited: Experience, Heterogeneity, Work effort and Work-Schedule Flexibility." Industrial and Labor Relations Review 56:273-94.
    3. ^ Correll, Shelley, Benard Stephen and In Paik. 2007. "Getting a Job: Is There a Motherhood Penalty?" American Journal of Sociology 112(5):1297-1339.
    4. ^ Budig, Michelle and Melissa Hodges. 2010. "Differences in Disadvantage: Variation in the Motherhood Penalty across White Women's Earning Distribution." American Sociological Review 75(5):1-24


    So that's that on the motherhood penalty thing.






    Also, as a very outspoken atheist, I resent you accusing me of utilizing the "God of the gaps" argument. Let me retort, impassioned and embittered, with this scathing reply: Sexism as an official policy has a documented and well-researched past, and as such cannot be considered to be a fallacious answer to any question regarding discrimination in the workplace. It existed once; whereas you say, "It does not exist in the workplace anymore o any significant degree," I say, "It does." You must admit that it has been a factor in the past, and thus logic dictates that it could be a factor in the present, no?


    Also, I would like to know what proof you need. Because I can summon up U.S. Dep't of Labor study that specifically talks about the existence of an undefined wage gap between the genders.



    I totally robbed the "no?" thing from Explorer, and it feels good.
     
  2. Jakke

    Jakke Pretty wisdomous

    Messages:
    4,365
    Likes Received:
    773
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
    And it is not possible for me to control all of these right now. However, as the wiki uses them as citations, it can be seen as a representation of the gist of them. Did you notice all the "mays" and "coulds"? This is because it is a hypothesis.



    Let me give you an analogy. Flu causes fever, this is documented and well researched, correct?
    If a patient with a fever is admitted to a hospital, do the doctors assume that the patient has a flu based on the documented cases of influenza causing fever?

    It is very possible that sexism, to a significant degree, in wages could exist, but there does not seem to be positive proof that pinpoints this as a cause.

    I sincerely apologize for any image problems calling on god of the gaps might have caused you.

    Well, apart from most of the male employers admitting that they are sexist bastards, I would like someone to account for the unnaccounted wage gap without presupposing that it is because male employers tend to be assholes.
    I don't dispute that there is an unexplained gap (and I do believe I have already posted that study), but I dispute your explanation for that gap.
     
  3. The Reverend

    The Reverend GHETTO KING OF SWAG

    Messages:
    3,457
    Likes Received:
    431
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2010
    Location:
    Arlington, TX
    I just don't understand how you can look at a set of data and not go for the simplest answer.

    Your metaphor is inaccurate. A patient has cancer, and because of this, is underweight. Patient slowly gains weight over time, then is reevaluated. Doctors are glad that the patient's weight is returning to a healthy number, but are still troubled by the gap between the patient's real and target weight. They then refuse to look at the cancer as a cause.

    Are you suggesting that at some point discrimination almost totally disappeared (or however you'd like to put it, to avoid straw men), and that there instead is some other cause? Because many, many studies have been done on this. And there is no other explanation. There is literally no accounting for the fact that, if all other things are equal, a statistical woman would make less than a statistical man. Discrimination is the only piece that fits this puzzle.
     
  4. Jakke

    Jakke Pretty wisdomous

    Messages:
    4,365
    Likes Received:
    773
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
    Because that is not how science works. What is perceived as "the simplest answer" depends on our society and our culture. In the 16th century the simplest explanation for disease was demons, before that the simplest explanation was bad air.

    I do not believe it was inaccurate. See, your argument went as follows:
    It is documented that sexism has previously been official policy. There is one symptom in common between this situation and from when sexism was common policy, thus logically should sexism be a current component too.
    And I'm not buying it, it does not have to be flu causing the fever, it can also be meningitis (which would arguably be worse:lol:).
    Your cancer methaphor is lacking in one area, the doctors could verify that the patient suffers from cancer, we have not been able to verify that the adjusted wage gap is due to discrimination.

    No, only a fool would claim discrimination is almost totally gone. I would however say that even though discrimination is decreasing quite a lot, the unaccounted gap is constant. One interpretation could of course be that while more and more men view women as equals (and vice-versa), they drop all that when they come to work every morning.

    I read an explanation just now in the report I posted, women tend to take out non-wage benefits like better health insurance to a greater degree than men, that will make the yearly salary lower.
    That is probably a part of many factors if it is accurate, but contrary to your claim, there are other explanations.
    Let us not also forget that I am open to a certain degree of sexism right now, but I do not believe it accounts for a major (or significant) part of the unaccounted gap.

    This is the final words from this analysis:
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
    Gothic Headhunter likes this.
  5. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,248
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    What the US Department of Labor said in your post is spot on to the point I have been trying to make. Discrimination exists (obviously), but there isn't just one factor at play and the entirety of the wage gap is not (and honestly cannot be) exclusively discrimination. The implication would be that EVERY employer discriminates against women.

    In any case it cannot be proven and I don't like working in absolutes or under faulty assumptions. It is actually more rational to believe that there are both sexist and non-sexist reasons for the wage gap. How much and to what degree can be argued until the end of time.
     
    Jakke likes this.
  6. Jakke

    Jakke Pretty wisdomous

    Messages:
    4,365
    Likes Received:
    773
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
    I felt it pretty accurate as well, I have always shivered when it has been mentioned how sexist male employers are, and my immediate thought have been:
    - What? All of them? How do you know that?
     
  7. viesczy

    viesczy SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,026
    Likes Received:
    61
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Location:
    On the fretboard!
    I cannot stand Ann Coulter, she isn't worth pinch of crap in Hell.

    That said, who cares what words are used by her? I mean really? The power of words does not come from the speaker, but in fact the power of words is given by the listener. Really.

    Any "offensive" term used is done so to elicit a response, only to actually empower the speaker. If you don't surrender that power, the speaker is only a nattering fool desperately looking for power. It isn't turn the other cheek, it isn't kill them with kindness either. It is the control of power, yours over yourself and not theirs over yourself.

    You can say whatever you want to my face, I will not flinch. You will always get a reply, you most likely won't be able to offer a rebuttal beyond "yo mama", but you won't make me flinch and you won't make me angry.

    Derek
     
  8. TaylorMacPhail

    TaylorMacPhail Heisenberg

    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Location:
    New Dominion, PE, Canada
    Reasons why getting mad at someone for saying retard is often unwarranted. 1) The standard definition of retard mentions nothing about mental illness, except for the disparaging slang use of course. 2) 9 times /10 people who use the word aren't even referring to mental illness (ex. Down Syndrome)

    Retard: to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.

    That being said, this woman still sounds like a cunt lol.
     
  9. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    235
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    So there's the actual definition of retard as a noun, of retarded, and retardation for you.

    What are those people referring to 90% of the time if not that? Why is it when kids use that word they often accompany it with that arm gesture and saying "duyyy" or similar?

    Don't kid yourself.
     
  10. TaylorMacPhail

    TaylorMacPhail Heisenberg

    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Location:
    New Dominion, PE, Canada
    Wow, very selective copy-pasting with those definitions. Not to mention, the MEDICAL definition of retardation obviously refers to mental illness, but we are talking about the general term.

    Start at the top and read down ;)
    Retard - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    However, 9/10 might be a bit of a stretch lol but using the word with or without those kind of gestures are two different cases.
     
  11. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,329
    Likes Received:
    235
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    "Why are you mad that I called you a faggot? You're not gay! Obviously I didn't mean that, I was just calling you a faggot. And you're kind of a Jew... not in the sense that you are a Hebrew, you're just really cheap. What? What did I say? Something retarded?"
     
  12. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,620
    Likes Received:
    1,160
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    Fascinating to read all those attempts to say sexism and racism in the workplace couldn't be assumed to be the primary reason for the wage gap... without a single countertheory being presented.

    Sounds like the typical attacks on evolution, no?

    I'm hopeful something will actually be presented as a meaningful factor which would be as powerfully explicative. Any thoughts, naysayers?
     
  13. Jakke

    Jakke Pretty wisdomous

    Messages:
    4,365
    Likes Received:
    773
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
    Wrong. As you can see in this thread, both Flint and I proposed alternative explanations. Explanations such as that women tend to take out other compensations than monetary ones, women tend to work less overtime and on less uncomfortable hours, they are also more likely to be home with children when they are sick, and men seems to be generally just better at negotiating a higher pay. But yeah, no other explanations.


    Wrong again. Attacks on evolution usually take three fundamental forms (from my highly anecdotal experience):
    -Anomaly hunting, i.e. if something seems to be intuitively wrong, all is wrong. This has not been done here.
    - Blind denial, "evil-ution can't have happened and that is that". Did not happen here either, we are open to that there could be a degree of sexism, but this degree has not been proven, and from what we have seen studies-wise, the possible degree does not seems to be significant.
    - God of the gaps, "We don't know, therefore god". Not committed from our side, but instead from your side; "we can't explain this gender wage gap, so therefore a multi-ethnical and multi-age conspiracy from male employers to give women less pay must exist".

    Do you understand the burden of proof? (I even have it in my signature, but in latin, since I am a pretentious sonofabitch)
    We have said that we do not buy into the explanation that sexism is at work here, since there is no evidence to support this, but rather a presupposition. Since you brought in a religious comparison, I can relate this to my and most other's atheism. We have not seen sufficient evidence to convince us of the existence of a god, the faithful just presupposes that that deity is in fact reality. It is not up to us to prove a negative (which can't be done), it is upp to the asserter to prove a positive.


    I would also like to address something that is an outright lie, or something that you just glanced over.. Race.
    I do not go near race in this discussion (I am just not confident enough to approach race outside of a biological context), so Flint was the one who adressed the non-sequitur accusation of that we deny racism being a possible factor in the lower pay for black people in particular. No where did he say that he is certain that there is no component of racism, he even clarified that he was willing to believe a higher degree of racism than sexism. He even adressed that very same claim from you earlier. And yet you continue to misrepresent his position. He even bolded it for you.
     
    AxeHappy and flint757 like this.
  14. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,248
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Did not say it was impossible, but I am curious as to why you feel like it should and undoubtedly be presumed to be the primary cause? Do you have any actual proof? It is like the Department of Labor stated, the degree CANNOT be proven and therefore means the person stating an absolute (i.e. you) is actually wrong. You may in fact be right in the end, but your approach is unscientific. I have never stated that it couldn't be the primary cause, but that it is unlikely (big difference). I'm not denying anything, it actually seems like everyone else is because somehow it just HAS to be discrimination and that is it.

    I brought race up because it does parallel quite well since we are discussing discrimination and it was also a counter argument, if memory serves, as I wasn't the first to bring it up. I have to say, though, I've been denied a ton of jobs, more than I can count, and it was not race, sex, or whatever else related (impossible given my supposed 'privileges' as I keep being told). I just wasn't the right person, wasn't pushy/persistent enough or there was someone better I was competing against. Most of the jobs I have gotten have been through people I know and I imagine that is in fact how a lot of people get their jobs. Yet the presupposed assumption when someone else whom fits into a 'minority' group (not always and not everyone jumps to that conclusion either thankfully) is that it had nothing to do with their presentation or abilities or experience, but discrimination. It could be discrimination and I'm sure there are plenty of cases where it is, in fact I'd be shocked if there wasn't. That does not then imply an absolute where failure to get a job, get in to a college, make as much as a colleague (harder to prove as that is private information), etc. is just always or 'primarily' discrimination. If it were easier to prove the law would have already stepped in because it is already illegal. The fact that they don't is proof enough that it is murky at best.

    The issue with the 70 cent theory is that it is based on the ENTIRE population. It does not take into account ALL factors that go into a persons job and salary (and there are a lot). Case-by-case would be far more appropriate, but then you have to deal with people lying, making assumptions and digging into peoples personal information, which isn't going to happen at most jobs as the only people whom should know your salary are the boss, you and HR. I've heard cases where people are saying they make less without even knowing or having any proof (rumors by the water cooler). Much like yourself they are just making the broad assumption that because he is a guy he MUST make more, otherwise the whole theory would go out the window in the first place.

    Fair doesn't really enter the job world anyhow as profit is always #1 and if we are discussing fair then jobs would be divided based on statistical populations (which completely removes responsibility, skill and assets from the equation). A company that hired based on discriminatory policies won't get very far anyhow, as it would mean they do not have the best and brightest simply because they are sexist or racist.

    In any case Jakke did a good enough job with his post :yesway:. I look forward to returning back to the thread and finding my posts twisted and torn apart to fit what y'all think I'm trying to say. :rolleyes:
     
  15. Jakke

    Jakke Pretty wisdomous

    Messages:
    4,365
    Likes Received:
    773
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Location:
    In a van... DOWN' BY THE RIVER!
    You bring up a good point, "woman" or "man" are two very big demographics. If you have a sample with only one common trait, their gender, I am not sure that would work in social sciences. There are too many human variables.
     
  16. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,248
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    That's the basis of the problem, one variable is not enough. How can gender come into play and the fact that only women can bear children not? There are many variable defined right along the gender line that offer up solid explanations for some of the variability. Since all of this is based on assumptions (sexist and non-sexist reasons) from past events and no personal information is present there is no absolute way for us to know who is right and wrong. Even if we could, neither would be right 100% of the time as society is far more complex than that.
     
  17. tacotiklah

    tacotiklah I am Denko (´・ω・`)

    Messages:
    6,601
    Likes Received:
    987
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Location:
    Lancaster, CA
  18. BuckarooBanzai

    BuckarooBanzai SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    152
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    His "documentary" reminded me of a butthurt 15 year old complaining about how his mommy made him go to church on /r/atheism. Based on that alone I don't really respect him all that much.
     
  19. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    231
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    I just noticed a google ad at the top of this page for one of this cunt's websites.

    Google is one scary bitch.
     
  20. FILTHnFEAR

    FILTHnFEAR Dread it, run from it....

    Messages:
    2,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Location:
    Naptown
    I love the politics section of music forums. Some of the same people that are so informed and knowledgeable of music and gear, sound like complete retards on political and social issues.

    Oops, did I use the "R" word?

    To use the word to describe someone that actually has mental disabilities is low-class and rather reprehensible. Someone that does so should be kicked in their teeth. But to make a big deal out of someone using the word in the context that Coulter did shows you how ridiculous this country has gotten with this politically correct nonsense. Rather petty and ignorant.
     

Share This Page