Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Biden Worried About Equal Pay for Women
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 18:11:34 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <20240529181134.00000c66@example.com>
References: <BAudna22TYexEcr7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<20240529174223.00002810@example.com>
	<atropos-CF936F.14554129052024@news.giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 00:11:38 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="de9df25d9227e76b2ce06db56e8efee2";
	logging-data="1265112"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19V0Oidrb+nGdcVdmx4lrPUVBOT6a2avTo="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:74B0R3KGB4AtBMLKwaH93rBnKLw=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.41; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240529-8, 5/29/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 4165

On Wed, 29 May 2024 14:55:41 -0700
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> In article <20240529174223.00002810@example.com>,
>  Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 29 May 2024 20:12:28 +0000
> > BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > Old Joe-- or at least whoever is actually writing the tweets
> > > under his account-- has been extremely worried lately about equal
> > > pay for women in sports, pointing out that Caitlin Clark, the #1
> > > draftee in the WNBA is only making $77,000/year while her #1 male
> > > NBA counterpart, Victor Wembanyama, makes $12.1 million/year.
> > > 
> > > https://ibb.co/9Wy7jk2
> > > 
> > > While that conveniently ignores that Clark also signed a $28
> > > million endorsement deal with Nike, it's weird that Biden and all
> > > the other folks who get het up over this sort of thing never have
> > > a problem with it when it goes in reverse, like, for example, the
> > > top male and female fashion models:
> > > 
> > > https://ibb.co/tZ3Xmmj
> > > 
> > > Equal pay for equal work?
> > >   
> > You've reminded me of something that irked me several years back.
> > When feminism first started taking hold in corporate Canada, the
> > initial demand was for equal pay for equal work. On this basis, the
> > women who worked as switchboard operators demanded to be paid the
> > same as the linesmen who repaired broken wires. Observers quite
> > reasonably scoffed at the idea that sitting in an office (probably
> > air-conditioned and certainly heated) making telephone calls all
> > day was "equal" to the work the linesmen were doing working
> > outdoors in all kinds of weather conditions, often in blistering
> > heat or miserable cold or drenching rain.  
> 
> They should have granted them the equal pay, then required all of
> them to be cross-trained in each other's jobs and work half the year
> at each job. So if the women wanted the money, they'd have to spend
> six months in the heat and bitter cold climbing power poles and
> rigging lines.
> 
> Betcha they wouldn't have agreed to that.
> 
It would have been interesting to see how they responded to that
proposal! Obviously, they would not have been happy but I'd be curious
to know how they framed their objections. Would they have a thoughtful
reasoned argument for why they should still get equal pay WITHOUT
having to do outdoor work? Somehow, I doubt it....

> > Then the mantra became "equal pay for work of equal value": the
> > women simply declared that their work had equal value to what the
> > men were doing so they still deserved the same pay. I guess no one
> > wanted to dispute the value of the work so the mantra stayed
> > unchanged from that point on, as far as I know. I find it
> > interesting that switchboard operators have gone the way of the
> > dodo but linesmen have not; their jobs were not as easy to
> > automate/computerize as what the switchboard operators did.  



-- 
Rhino