November jobs report : F+23.2 - Is this even possible without open discrimination?
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (10)
sorted by:
Yes, absolutely.
Remember, Imp: because of 'gender equality' policies, many jobs are heavily sex segregated. And men are the predominant sex of many blue collar jobs. The oil industry is getting fucking shellacked, men are predominant in that. Manufacturing is not being recovered, men are predominant in that. Extraction & Exploitation industries have low ESGs and are 'dangerous to Climate Change objectives', and men are predominant in that.
If you favor preserving industries like marketing, journalism, nursing, and libraries, you're going to preference women.
Disparity does not equate to discrimination, especially on that disparity.
The economy is being intentionally bloated with unnecessary bureaucratic work that doesn't pertain to wealth generation, and men are already disinclined to stay out of the workforce with welfare payments. As a result, you're gonna get gender disparity.
This is the nature of a make-work scheme. The Biden Regime keeps pretending that we aren't in a recession, and won't be. The fucking Fed Chairman actually had the balls to come out and say that price-rises will fall off a cliff next year, and he expects wages to keep up with inflation at a rate of 2%!
Some discrimination is absolutely occurring, but what you're seeing are the macro-economic trends of a bad make-work policy that's about to fucking explode in everyone's faces.
To be fair, I didnt read this thoroughly, but it sounds like you are saying "no you're incorrect" and then explaining mechanisms that show he is correct
It can have the outcome of favoring women without the intent of specifically favoring women. That's what Gizortnik is describing.
I would add also that the way that men get treated by women among millennial and zoomer populations causes a general discouraging spirit among young men. Why go out and try to find work, when the additional money won't improve your prospects at having a satisfying life, and you can instead sit in a small apartment on welfare, playing video games?
I'm just answering his question specifically. And again: disparity does not equate to discrimination. It's not racist policing that causes black people to be incarcerated more, and it's not policies targeting only women that creates a higher likelihood of employment.
These large scale macro-economic results are not coming from explicitly anti-male or pro-female policies. Women as a demographic are just going to be effected differently when the Left is working on their pet projects.
No, you always have to read his posts in the context of some vast female conspiracy, and therefore he’s always wrong.
November is the start of Christmas shopping season and most of the shitty temp retail jobs go to women.
He started out OK with talking about blue collar work. Blue collar wages have also taken a beating over the last few decades relative to other types of work. It's immigration and outsourcing that have caused it.
The problem for both TheImp and Gizortnik is that they are both liberals so they will support sacrificing wages and working conditions in order to make line go up. Liberal ideology doesn't have any worthwhile fix to this situation.
As Gizortnik said, men and women work in different fields, often. Not everyone is or should be 50/50. So if one subset of jobs comes back, it could heavily favor women, if another comes back it could heavily favor men.
There can be discrimination involved, or at the very least past discrimination that led to disparities, but there certainly doesn't have to be.
Is there discrimination in this case? Potentially. The admin certainly loves to tout and promote women, so it's not out of the question that they could have pushed for such an outcome, but it's also very possible that those are just the jobs that ended up coming back. They'll certainly take credit for it either way, though.
You wanted women to work so what are you complaining about? You got your wish.
Hey! The IMP is back!