8 ms·

Why exactly I don't see these many discussion about women in construction industry as I see about women in IT? Why exactly I don't see any discussion about cour

Why exactly I don't see these many discussion about women in construction industry as I see about women in IT? Why exactly I don't see any discussion about courts giving children to their fathers in 50% of cases? Why exactly my wife is so brainwashed that even when I make 5.2 times money she does, she still needs to go to work which costs us more than her paycheck once we pay for the childcare and food. Her work is net negative to home budget. Unfortunately, she doesn't get it because as her mom says "women MUST work". Any surprise Western Civilization is in decline?

jwoah12 13y ago
> Why exactly I don't see these many discussion about women in construction industry as I see about women in IT? Because you're reading a forum called Hacker News.
- LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
  BS. Because the feminists are interested only in equality in highly paid jobs for women.
  - asdasf 13y ago
    Construction jobs are highly paid.
    - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
      BS again. I take my 60-100 use/hr vs. construction 20-30usd/hr any second. And then women don't really get dirty, dangerous jobs. They want only equality in safe, clean nice offices.
      - asdasf 13y ago
        You go right ahead and keep on pretending you make $200k/year then, I'm sure if you pretend hard enough it will suddenly become relevant.
        LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
        You are the one pretending not to see that women are after "equality" as far as clean, safe office jobs go. I don't you see you or them demanding 50% of construction jobs to be filled by females. Yeah, I will probably make $260k this year. My Manager is a woman and I love working with her. Because she is smart and has more balls than most dudes have. I have no problem with women. I have problem with people who want special treatment. And these come in all sexes, colors, shapes and sizes.
        asdasf 13y ago
        Protip: when you are arguing with someone who is "on your side" as if they are your opponent, you might just be an overzealous douche who wants to argue too much.
rayiner 13y ago
> Why exactly I don't see any discussion about courts giving children to their fathers in 50% of cases? Because when fathers do actually contest custody, they usually get joint or sole custody? http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias... ("These trends were apparent in an earlier study of a sample of 500 Middlesex County cases filed between 1978 and 1981. Fathers had sought sole custody in about 8% of the cases. They received sole custody in 41% of those cases, and joint custody in 38%. In 5% of the cases, custody went to someone other than a parent. In instances in which fathers sought sole custody, mothers received sole custody in only 15% of the cases."). > Why exactly my wife is so brainwashed that even when I make 5.2 times money she does, she still needs to go to work which costs us more than her paycheck once we pay for the childcare and food. Because she can do math and realizes that while child care expenses are temporary (and drop off substantially in just 5-6 years once children enter school), the lifetime impact on earnings from taking time off to raise children is substantial and permanent?
- sanskritabelt 13y ago
  Need to keep that resume up to date for when she finally musters up the gumption to dump his MRA ass.
- asdasf 13y ago
  Did you notice how that study didn't control for anything? Like say, the reasons that fathers were seeking sole custody? Fathers virtually only seek sole custody when the mother is abusive or grossly negligent. In cases where the mother is not abusive or negligent, fathers almost always accept minimal joint custody as they feel it is what is best for the children. The fact that people throw this around as some sick attempt to portray fathers are not caring about their children and the courts being totally fair is disgusting.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The results are similar for several studies that do not look just at fathers who seek sole custody. See this meta-analysis of several studies: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias.... I'll quote the relevant part: """ Although perceptions of bias that discourage fathers from seeking custody are a concern, n52 the outcome of cases in which custody is contested provides a more direct source of information about possible judicial gender bias. We heard testimony from George Kelly, a representative of Concerned Fathers, that in contested custody cases, mothers are awarded physical custody over 90% of the time. Mr. Kelly was unable to provide substantiation, however, n53 and our own investigation revealed a very different picture. The statewide sample of attorneys who responded to the family law survey had collectively represented fathers seeking custody in over 2,100 cases in the last 5 years. n54 They reported that the fathers obtained primary physical custody in 29% of the cases, and joint physical custody in an additional 65% of the cases. Thus, when fathers actively sought physical custody, mothers obtained primary physical custody in only 7% of cases. The attorneys reported that the fathers had been primary caretakers in 29% of the cases in which they had sought custody. The preliminary findings of the Middlesex Divorce Research Group relitigation study show a similarly high rate of paternal success, but fewer awards of joint physical custody. In their sample of 700 cases in Middlesex County between 1978 and 1984, fathers had sought custody in 57 cases (8.14% of the sample). In two-thirds of the cases in which fathers sought custody, they received primary physical custody (42% in which fathers were awarded sole legal and sole physical custody, plus [*832] 25% in which fathers were awarded joint legal and primary physical custody). Joint physical and joint legal custody was awarded in 3.5% of cases. In 11% of the cases, mothers received primary physical and joint legal custody; in 12%, mothers were awarded sole legal and physical custody; other custodial arrangements were ordered in the remaining cases. Thus, when fathers sought custody, mothers received primary physical custody in fewer than one-quarter of the cases in the Middlesex study. Information about which parent had been the primary caretaker was not available for the Middlesex cases. These trends were apparent in an earlier study of a sample of 500 Middlesex County cases filed between 1978 and 1981. Fathers had sought sole custody in about 8% of the cases. They received sole custody in 41% of those cases, and joint custody in 38%. In 5% of the cases, custody went to someone other than a parent. In instances in which fathers sought sole custody, mothers received sole custody in only 15% of the cases (Phear et al., 1983). These statistics may be a surprise to many. They are, however, consistent with findings in other states. A study of court records in Los Angeles County, California, in 1977 found that fathers who sought sole custody obtained it in 63% of the cases (up from a success rate of 37% in 1972) (Weitzman, 1985, p. 233). A nationwide survey of all reported appellate decisions in child custody cases in 1982 found that fathers obtained custody in 51% of the cases, up from an estimated 10% in 1980 (Atkinson, 1984). The high success rate of fathers does not by itself establish gender bias against women. Additional evidence, however, indicates that women may be less able to afford the lawyers and experts needed in contested custody cases (see "Family Law Overview") and that, in contested cases, different and stricter standards are applied to mothers. """
gaius 13y ago
Feminists look up the socioeconomic spectrum and see men as CEOs say, and want some of that for themselves and their friends. Fair enough, who doesn't want success? But they never look down and see the men mining coal, collecting trash, packing meat, pouring cement and all the other dirty, dangerous, low pay and low prestige jobs. We actually need those people far more than we do a new social network. Society collapses without them. That is something the movement is going to need to reconcile at some point.
- Jtsummers 13y ago
  Don't say never. You think police or fire departments or military are highly paid or safe? Many women have fought for the chance to show they can do those jobs.
  - gaius 13y ago
    Sure, that's where prestige comes in. For many people, the social standing of their job is as if not more important than their pay. But my point stands. Real equality must permeate all jobs.
  - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
    Fought for what? 50% representation?
    - Jtsummers 13y ago
      I suppose there are some who want that, but many just want the opportunity. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Barring people from an activity strictly because of their gender or race is absurd. The race barrier has huge holes in it today, and the gender barrier is being torn apart as well. Here's an example (from my example professions). Women in the police forces used to be relegated to meter maids, secretarial/administrative roles and other "safe" jobs. Promotion into positions like detective were not open, or only open for the rare ones that caught the right persons attention or had some other pull (family, political, whatever) or the one who did 10x what their male colleagues did to show they were capable. Today those barriers are gone (going away?).

jwoah12 13y ago

> Why exactly I don't see these many discussion about women in construction industry as I see about women in IT? Because you're reading a forum called Hacker News.

LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
BS. Because the feminists are interested only in equality in highly paid jobs for women.
- asdasf 13y ago
  Construction jobs are highly paid.
  - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
    BS again. I take my 60-100 use/hr vs. construction 20-30usd/hr any second. And then women don't really get dirty, dangerous jobs. They want only equality in safe, clean nice offices.
    - asdasf 13y ago
      You go right ahead and keep on pretending you make $200k/year then, I'm sure if you pretend hard enough it will suddenly become relevant.
      - LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
        You are the one pretending not to see that women are after "equality" as far as clean, safe office jobs go. I don't you see you or them demanding 50% of construction jobs to be filled by females. Yeah, I will probably make $260k this year. My Manager is a woman and I love working with her. Because she is smart and has more balls than most dudes have. I have no problem with women. I have problem with people who want special treatment. And these come in all sexes, colors, shapes and sizes.
        asdasf 13y ago
        Protip: when you are arguing with someone who is "on your side" as if they are your opponent, you might just be an overzealous douche who wants to argue too much.

rayiner 13y ago

> Why exactly I don't see any discussion about courts giving children to their fathers in 50% of cases? Because when fathers do actually contest custody, they usually get joint or sole custody? http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias... ("These trends were apparent in an earlier study of a sample of 500 Middlesex County cases filed between 1978 and 1981. Fathers had sought sole custody in about 8% of the cases. They received sole custody in 41% of those cases, and joint custody in 38%. In 5% of the cases, custody went to someone other than a parent. In instances in which fathers sought sole custody, mothers received sole custody in only 15% of the cases."). > Why exactly my wife is so brainwashed that even when I make 5.2 times money she does, she still needs to go to work which costs us more than her paycheck once we pay for the childcare and food. Because she can do math and realizes that while child care expenses are temporary (and drop off substantially in just 5-6 years once children enter school), the lifetime impact on earnings from taking time off to raise children is substantial and permanent?

sanskritabelt 13y ago
Need to keep that resume up to date for when she finally musters up the gumption to dump his MRA ass.
asdasf 13y ago
Did you notice how that study didn't control for anything? Like say, the reasons that fathers were seeking sole custody? Fathers virtually only seek sole custody when the mother is abusive or grossly negligent. In cases where the mother is not abusive or negligent, fathers almost always accept minimal joint custody as they feel it is what is best for the children. The fact that people throw this around as some sick attempt to portray fathers are not caring about their children and the courts being totally fair is disgusting.
- rayiner 13y ago
  The results are similar for several studies that do not look just at fathers who seek sole custody. See this meta-analysis of several studies: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias.... I'll quote the relevant part: """ Although perceptions of bias that discourage fathers from seeking custody are a concern, n52 the outcome of cases in which custody is contested provides a more direct source of information about possible judicial gender bias. We heard testimony from George Kelly, a representative of Concerned Fathers, that in contested custody cases, mothers are awarded physical custody over 90% of the time. Mr. Kelly was unable to provide substantiation, however, n53 and our own investigation revealed a very different picture. The statewide sample of attorneys who responded to the family law survey had collectively represented fathers seeking custody in over 2,100 cases in the last 5 years. n54 They reported that the fathers obtained primary physical custody in 29% of the cases, and joint physical custody in an additional 65% of the cases. Thus, when fathers actively sought physical custody, mothers obtained primary physical custody in only 7% of cases. The attorneys reported that the fathers had been primary caretakers in 29% of the cases in which they had sought custody. The preliminary findings of the Middlesex Divorce Research Group relitigation study show a similarly high rate of paternal success, but fewer awards of joint physical custody. In their sample of 700 cases in Middlesex County between 1978 and 1984, fathers had sought custody in 57 cases (8.14% of the sample). In two-thirds of the cases in which fathers sought custody, they received primary physical custody (42% in which fathers were awarded sole legal and sole physical custody, plus [*832] 25% in which fathers were awarded joint legal and primary physical custody). Joint physical and joint legal custody was awarded in 3.5% of cases. In 11% of the cases, mothers received primary physical and joint legal custody; in 12%, mothers were awarded sole legal and physical custody; other custodial arrangements were ordered in the remaining cases. Thus, when fathers sought custody, mothers received primary physical custody in fewer than one-quarter of the cases in the Middlesex study. Information about which parent had been the primary caretaker was not available for the Middlesex cases. These trends were apparent in an earlier study of a sample of 500 Middlesex County cases filed between 1978 and 1981. Fathers had sought sole custody in about 8% of the cases. They received sole custody in 41% of those cases, and joint custody in 38%. In 5% of the cases, custody went to someone other than a parent. In instances in which fathers sought sole custody, mothers received sole custody in only 15% of the cases (Phear et al., 1983). These statistics may be a surprise to many. They are, however, consistent with findings in other states. A study of court records in Los Angeles County, California, in 1977 found that fathers who sought sole custody obtained it in 63% of the cases (up from a success rate of 37% in 1972) (Weitzman, 1985, p. 233). A nationwide survey of all reported appellate decisions in child custody cases in 1982 found that fathers obtained custody in 51% of the cases, up from an estimated 10% in 1980 (Atkinson, 1984). The high success rate of fathers does not by itself establish gender bias against women. Additional evidence, however, indicates that women may be less able to afford the lawyers and experts needed in contested custody cases (see "Family Law Overview") and that, in contested cases, different and stricter standards are applied to mothers. """

gaius 13y ago

Feminists look up the socioeconomic spectrum and see men as CEOs say, and want some of that for themselves and their friends. Fair enough, who doesn't want success? But they never look down and see the men mining coal, collecting trash, packing meat, pouring cement and all the other dirty, dangerous, low pay and low prestige jobs. We actually need those people far more than we do a new social network. Society collapses without them. That is something the movement is going to need to reconcile at some point.

Jtsummers 13y ago
Don't say never. You think police or fire departments or military are highly paid or safe? Many women have fought for the chance to show they can do those jobs.
- gaius 13y ago
  Sure, that's where prestige comes in. For many people, the social standing of their job is as if not more important than their pay. But my point stands. Real equality must permeate all jobs.
- LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
  Fought for what? 50% representation?
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    I suppose there are some who want that, but many just want the opportunity. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Barring people from an activity strictly because of their gender or race is absurd. The race barrier has huge holes in it today, and the gender barrier is being torn apart as well. Here's an example (from my example professions). Women in the police forces used to be relegated to meter maids, secretarial/administrative roles and other "safe" jobs. Promotion into positions like detective were not open, or only open for the rare ones that caught the right persons attention or had some other pull (family, political, whatever) or the one who did 10x what their male colleagues did to show they were capable. Today those barriers are gone (going away?).