Women graduating in college more than men

[Jaylan]

You should really educate yourself on misandry, and the result of feminism. but a one eyed joe aint fit to push a broom, like you is far to progressive to look a the truth.

Gaylan, step up, be a man.

This is your response to everything I said? Youre a fvking clown dude.

Youre talking about misandry when youre the one here trying to shame men and call them beta faggo0ts because of how they use their money. Which is funny because you have no wealth or status yourself. You barely have the means to feed yourself, and you have the audacity to hate on other men the way you have in this thread.

And you wanna talk about misandry? Get a fvking clue you toolbag.

How about you step up and be a man first. Get a job, maybe go to school or learn a trade, and make something of your life instead mooching off your neighbors internet to post here. Dont tell me to be a man when Ive worked crap jobs, gone to school, matured and gained experience, and am now able to better my life and provide for myself.

How about you take your own advice a be a fvking man. Unlike you, I dont need to sit and put down other men, and whine about feminism in an attempt to shift blame for personal failures.

 

[VikingKing]

This is your response to everything I said? Youre a fvking clown dude.

Youre talking about misandry when youre the one here trying to shame men and call them beta faggo0ts because of how they use their money. Which is funny because you have no wealth or status yourself. You barely have the means to feed yourself, and you have the audacity to hate on other men the way you have in this thread.

And you wanna talk about misandry? Get a fvking clue you toolbag.

How about you step up and be a man first. Get a job, maybe go to school or learn a trade, and make something of your life instead mooching off your neighbors internet to post here. Dont tell me to be a man when Ive worked crap jobs, gone to school, matured and gained experience, and am now able to better my life and provide for myself.

How about you take your own advice a be a fvking man. Unlike you, I dont need to sit and put down other men, and whine about feminism in an attempt to shift blame for personal failures.

Ain't nobody got time fo dat!

 

[Syrio]

Have you ever considered marrying gaylan now that gay marriage is legal?

Wait do you mean Jaylan? I noticed you spelled his name with a G twice now. Why are you doing that? I don't understand. Can you explain please?

 

[JaegerPilot217]

I expect a girl Im going to be serious with to be college educated.

Most people tend to date people similar to them. College educated generally date other college educated folks. And people tend to date within a similar income bracket.

Having things in common breeds understanding and its easier to relate to one another. Im not saying I wouldnt date a girl who hasnt gone to school...but I generally have more in common with women who are educated and are working professionals.

I notice a big difference in the quality of a woman and the kind of job she has based on her education. Where I live, the women who didnt go to college are generally less quality, and less intellectual. This isnt all women...but sure does seem to be a lot of them.
Really? Because I know smart dudes who got grants and scholarships during college. Heck, guys looking to get into teaching have the board of education basically begging them to come aboard where I live. They are trying to diversify the teaching base and get more role models of different backgrounds into the field.

And when it comes to post-grad acceptance and placement into those programs, there does seem to be a preference for men, considering the shortage of male teachers in primary and secondary education.
Thats one thing that surprised me at university. My business school was half female, and I had always assumed it was a male dominated major before I got to uni.
Most of my professors in college were objective....but a few clearly leaned left or right politically, and a couple others favored male or female students more.

With regards to the "work harder" advice. Honestly thats a big part of it. Maybe it was just my luck...but whenever I had group work to do or team assignments, the person who seemed to do the least amount and least quality work in the group always seemed to be a guy.

This isnt to say I never saw females slack off...and I know some female college drop outs myself....but women by and large seem to at least try and finish 2-year college. They seem to have more to prove and/or at least wanna finish up something in school. I think part of this is that a lot of work women want to get into requires at the least, a 2-year degree nowadays, even for secretarial work.

On the other hand, there are numerous traditional male jobs that only require apprenticeship, getting licensing, and going to vocational school. While there are a lot of jobs women can get going this route...I can think of many more male dominated fields that go this route. And I dont think these numbers go into the college graduation figures. Truck drivers, construction workers, plumbers and HVAC guys usually get to where they are through vocational school, apprenticeship and then licensing.

Anyways, to sum that all up, I think women are more likely to graduate college and less likely to slack off in school, because they need it more to get a decent job.

I guess it depends on what you are looking for

 

[dasein]

Controlling for occupation and numbers of hours worked would be like controlling for personality type in a personality test. We know that women make less money.

In case anyone is interested, when leftist clowns start up with the bogus wage gap arguments and cite to raw outcome BLS stats as support, here's how to shut them down with something called "truth."

1. BLS outcome numbers are only good for comparing broad trends in whole economies and industries. They are not and never have been suited to comparing which gender makes more.

2. Whereas more and more women are sole earners with even some primary family breadwinners, the vast majority of primary family breadwinners in the US are men. As such, in that role, you don't have a choice, you work or your family goes hungry. You don't have the option to work part-time or work fewer hours. More women have more choices to work less, and as is typical in leftist illogic, that is distorted into a supposed gender disadvantage women suffer from as opposed to the truth, it is a gender based advantage they enjoy. This principle applies throughout the debunk of the gender wage gap in the US. Women generally have more choices today, men fewer.

3. A fulltime BLS workweek is 30 hours. So this means that the 50 hour a week primary earner man and the 30 hour a week secondary earner woman in the cubicle across the way are accounted exactly the same inaccurately. Ruins the BLS numbers as dispositive of anything right there.

4. BLS job categories lump lots of vastly different positions into the same category. A receptionist in an insurance firm who sits in air conditioning answering the phone (mostly women by women's choice) makes $10 an hour. The commissioned salesman at the desk next to hers makes 3x as much out calling on people busting his ass, and receiving no base salary at all. BLS numbers count these two as the same job (financial services) when they are most certainly not. This applies across many fields in many ways, and usually in women's favor for wage gap arguments wherever there is a comfortable easy low-pay job sitting next to a hard uncomfortable commission job. Once again, the man -might- like to sit in the AC on his ass and make $10 an hour, but in many cases, that choice is not available to him.

5. BLS categories have no way to account for experience, work volume and consistency in the workforce. A 40 year old who took 7 years off to have children or work on their golf swing is not nearly as valuable as the 33 y.o. with the same experience and most certainly should not earn as much. In some few jobs, women do more work volume than men, but in a vast majority of jobs, men do a multiple of female work. Women take vastly more big chunks of time away from work than men, mostly due to maternity.

Books, articles, have been dedicated to the above simple facts for some time now. There's really no excuse for remaining ignorant of why BLS number based wage gaps are bogus. So we can conclude about people who blithely make the standard leftist wage gap argument either 1. They are stupid and willing to forward an argument they don't truly understand in context because it fits their political agenda, or 2. They are purposefully dishonest POSs and nothing that comes out of their mouths is worthy of any consideration.

 

[Syrio]

In case anyone is interested, when leftist clowns start up with the bogus wage gap arguments and cite to raw outcome BLS stats as support, here's how to shut them down with something called "truth."

1. BLS outcome numbers are only good for comparing broad trends in whole economies and industries. They are not and never have been suited to comparing which gender makes more.

2. Whereas more and more women are sole earners with even some primary family breadwinners, the vast majority of primary family breadwinners in the US are men. As such, in that role, you don't have a choice, you work or your family goes hungry. You don't have the option to work part-time or work fewer hours. More women have more choices to work less, and as is typical in leftist illogic, that is distorted into a supposed gender disadvantage women suffer from as opposed to the truth, it is a gender based advantage they enjoy. This principle applies throughout the debunk of the gender wage gap in the US. Women generally have more choices today, men fewer.

3. A fulltime BLS workweek is 30 hours. So this means that the 50 hour a week primary earner man and the 30 hour a week secondary earner woman in the cubicle across the way are accounted exactly the same inaccurately. Ruins the BLS numbers as dispositive of anything right there.

4. BLS job categories lump lots of vastly different positions into the same category. A receptionist in an insurance firm who sits in air conditioning answering the phone (mostly women by women's choice) makes $10 an hour. The commissioned salesman at the desk next to hers makes 3x as much out calling on people busting his ass, and receiving no base salary at all. BLS numbers count these two as the same job (financial services) when they are most certainly not. This applies across many fields in many ways, and usually in women's favor for wage gap arguments wherever there is a comfortable easy low-pay job sitting next to a hard uncomfortable commission job. Once again, the man -might- like to sit in the AC on his ass and make $10 an hour, but in many cases, that choice is not available to him.

5. BLS categories have no way to account for experience, work volume and consistency in the workforce. A 40 year old who took 7 years off to have children or work on their golf swing is not nearly as valuable as the 33 y.o. with the same experience and most certainly should not earn as much. In some few jobs, women do more work volume than men, but in a vast majority of jobs, men do a multiple of female work. Women take vastly more big chunks of time away from work than men, mostly due to maternity.

Books, articles, have been dedicated to the above simple facts for some time now. There's really no excuse for remaining ignorant of why BLS number based wage gaps are bogus. So we can conclude about people who blithely make the standard leftist wage gap argument either 1. They are stupid and willing to forward an argument they don't truly understand in context because it fits their political agenda, or 2. They are purposefully dishonest POSs and nothing that comes out of their mouths is worthy of any consideration.

Okay, I'll respond to you because your response was actually reasonable, even though parts of it were very presumptuous and dumb.

The point I was making earlier, if you read my post, was that controlling for occupation is pointless. If occupations that have mostly women make less money, we are now faced with the question: "Why do those occupations earn less money?" Do occupations chosen by women earn less money because they are considered to require less skill? Or is it because most of the people in those fields are women? I honestly don't know the answer to the question, but because it still exists you can't just claim it's because of the profession itself, since we have no idea whether or not that's true. Furthermore, even within the same field women do tend to get paid less. Also there have been multiple studies where they sent out identical resumes with male and female names, and the male ones consistently get more replies and more positive response.

You guys are arguing about hours as if women are choosing to work fewer hours. Do you think most people choose how many hours they work? I don't know what jobs you guys have had, but every job I've ever had I did not get to choose how many hours per week I worked. That was assigned to me. If a supervisor lets the men work more hours than women, then that is just another means to the end of men having a higher income.

On your fourth point, you once again have the same fallacy. Just because a man has a higher paying job doesn't mean that it's because the woman CHOSE a lower paying job. This is presumptuous and dumb. Furthermore, the opposite could be the case just as often. It probably isn't, but that just supports the argument that men make more money than women.

You seem to be oversimplifying and misunderstanding the argument. You think that I was saying women make less money at the same job with the same experience and qualifications. This is probably true a decent amount of the time, but that's only a small part of why women make less money.

And for the record, I'll state it again: I have no political agenda. In fact, I don't even think we need to change things gender/occupation wise. However, I can at least recognize that men obviously have it better.

 

[dasein]

You seem to be oversimplifying and misunderstanding the argument.

Pure projection.

It's pretty obvious you have 0 (or close to it) work experience in the private sector, but OK.

My post was clear and not addressed responsively by you. Why did you even bother to reply as you didn't address any of it directly? For one example, I described -exactly- why and how women choose fewer hours, easier lower paid jobs, more of them are secondary as opposed to primary wage earners. You ignore this entirely. For another example, I dealt directly with problems in BLS job classifications, which you also ignored entirely and typed out your irrelevant, babbling second paragraph instead. In essence, you have been shown the error of your reliance on BLS numbers to found a wage gap, and instead of dropping it, learning, and moving on, want to cling and argue. This makes you either a purposeful idiot or a purposeful liar, which is it?

Yes, we do live in a world where women -choose- to work less, to work less dangerous taxing jobs, to leave and return to the workplace more than men. Only a purposefully dishonest person tries to spin or distort what is a defined advantage that women enjoy into a disadvantage towards the typical feminist lie narrative.

To repeat, anyone who uses BLS numbers to ground the typical "women only earn X% of what men earn" argument, after being educated as to why those numbers don't work, is either an idiot or a purposeful liar.

...However, I can at least recognize that men obviously have it better.

Yet you do not substantiate that in the least, just want it accepted wholesale without question. Maybe that works in your women's studies class, not here.

 

[JaegerPilot217]

Any guys here that were able to pull, attract women who had college degrees meanwhile the guy only had a high school diploma? Made less money than she did? Not saying that I'm looking for a sugar momma or female breadwinner, its because the woman's looks and body alone is what attracts me to her in the first place

 

[Syrio]

Pure projection.

It's pretty obvious you have 0 (or close to it) work experience in the private sector, but OK.

My post was clear and not addressed responsively by you. Why did you even bother to reply as you didn't address any of it directly? For one example, I described -exactly- why and how women choose fewer hours, easier lower paid jobs, more of them are secondary as opposed to primary wage earners. You ignore this entirely. For another example, I dealt directly with problems in BLS job classifications, which you also ignored entirely and typed out your irrelevant, babbling second paragraph instead. In essence, you have been shown the error of your reliance on BLS numbers to found a wage gap, and instead of dropping it, learning, and moving on, want to cling and argue. This makes you either a purposeful idiot or a purposeful liar, which is it?

Yes, we do live in a world where women -choose- to work less, to work less dangerous taxing jobs, to leave and return to the workplace more than men. Only a purposefully dishonest person tries to spin or distort what is a defined advantage that women enjoy into a disadvantage towards the typical feminist lie narrative.

To repeat, anyone who uses BLS numbers to ground the typical "women only earn X% of what men earn" argument, after being educated as to why those numbers don't work, is either an idiot or a purposeful liar.



Yet you do not substantiate that in the least, just want it accepted wholesale without question. Maybe that works in your women's studies class, not here.

lol okay, this was my mistake. I thought you were maybe a bit smarter than noobology and Danger. That was my bad.

1.) You need to reread both YOUR post and mine if you think I didn't respond to the points you made.
2.) You certainly didn't respond to any of the valid points that I made just now.
3.) Once you go back and correctly read and comprehend what both you wrote and I wrote, you probably still won't understand how I'm right
4.) You won't be getting any more responses, sorry. Like I said to the other guys, I don't have time to waste on less intelligent people who are incapable of reading/understanding. Trying to explain ideas that you will never even consider is futile. Even if it's obvious that I am right =/

 

[VikingKing]

We have it better when we are heartless and ruthless. Especially in terms of business, and women.

We have less options, less security nets.

If your a wolf, over time, you will win in the end.

 

[Stagger Lee]

So much ownage of Pyro by dasien, Danger, even myself and others, and s/he still can't grasp it.

Women with given all their preferential treatment in education and elsewhere, affirmative action in employment and promotions, still demand that men don't get paid more even if they work harder and more hours and are just flat making the firm more money .

In other words, women want to be just GIVEN (or take it away from men) more money than men. Why wouldn't they? That's how it works in households. That's how it works in college grading, affirmative action hiring quotes and promotions. Why shouldn't employers pay the unskilled part time female receptionist the same as the full time engineer who completed a grueling degree (and managed to dodge unfair grading, false sexual offense claims etc, or just being invisible to 60%+ female make up in college) and is earning more for the firm?

Why not? Women must just be given more money than men (or men less money) by employers no matter what. That's how everything else works for women now :crazy: .

 

[VikingKing]

Don't expect a woman to be logical. Doesn't even matter if she is a software engineer. When it comes to a topic that causes her to feel, all logic out the window.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Don't expect a woman to be logical. Doesn't even matter if she is a software engineer. When it comes to a topic that causes her to feel, all logic out the window.

Oh absolutely, and there's a good chance she didn't really even earn that "you go girl" computer science degree or at least the GPA in the first place.

But even if she was capable of objectively earning at least a C or better in engineering, it really wasn't her strong suit and she isn't an asset. She was just egged and carried on to get a "you go girl" degree and job position. How many better men had to be thrown under the bus to make room for her? Hopefully instead of being unfairly promoted over men she leaves the field for maternity and doesn't sue her employer over trumped up sexual harassment lol.

 

[Syrio]

Haha you guys keep posting here, I don't get why though. Are you guys like, mad or something?

 

[VikingKing]

Haha you guys keep posting here, I don't get why though. Are you guys like, mad or something?

Why? Umadbruh?

 

[( . )( . )]

You fellas using lots of logic with this chick :kick:

You're only eliciting what? One , maybe two "You're stooopid..poopey head" responses from her? If you're doing it right this is the result: (And this was all from one post btw, I highlighted the best bits for your amusement

Your previous comment on this thread was stupid enough that it didn't deserve a response. This comment, however, is so retarded and ignorant that it NEEDS a response.

You should use your tiny little brain to try to do the same, idiot.

which makes YOU stupid.

but you're displaying your stupidity and inferiority as a human here once again.

This is a good thing you fvcking retard. How the fvck are you this stupid? I seriously don't understand.

The rest of your points are stupid

You are a stupid person and I really, sincerely hope you don't have children.

Now I shall leave you with The Professional woman's ode:

"da professional womenz ode"

alpha fvcks and beta bucks
dat is how we roll
da butthexting ****ass we fvcks and sucks
and in our anuthes it doth deosul
alpha fvcks and beta bucks
it is da way of da fed
to transfer assetss to dose who butthext
cuckold dose who pay for our bread
beta bucks and alpha fvcks
it’s what day teach us we;’re entitled too
da assetts from betas we plucks
after da alphas desol us through our hole for poo
lzozozlzzolzlzlzlz
cuckold da betas ****hold da alphas
datsz what day taught us in mba grad school
as da feiisnsits see no truth nor justice in their laws
and say da great books for menz was all fools.
yes, yes, i did very good on my gmats
dey bernenakifed my soul away, left me with cats

zlzlzzozozozo

 

[Syrio]

You fellas using lots of logic with this chick :kick:

You're only eliciting what? One , maybe two "You're stooopid..poopey head" responses from her? If you're doing it right this is the result: (And this was all from one post btw, I highlighted the best bits for your amusement



Now I shall leave you with The Professional woman's ode:

Hahahaha damn dude, did I make you so mad that you actually took all the time to fish back through the times I've called you stupid and quote them here? Some of those are from quite a while ago, it must have taken you a significant amount of time to prepare that comment lol. I didn't realize you were so butt-hurt by me. Sorry I made you so mad!

 

[( . )( . )]

Hahahaha damn dude, did I make you so mad that you actually took all the time to fish back through the times I've called you stupid and quote them here?

Settle down princess. Don't get too carried away, it's a search button.

Some of those are from quite a while ago

Nope, all from one post.

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2080293&postcount=84






Stoopid poopey head

 

[Syrio]

Settle down princess. Don't get too carried away, it's a search button.

Nope, all from one post.

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2080293&postcount=84


Stoopid poopey head

Damn that post must have upset you a lot haha I'm sorry! I didn't mean to get you all riled up, my bad

 

[( . )( . )]

Damn that post must have upset you a lot haha I'm sorry! I didn't mean to get you all riled up, my bad

I know you are but what am I?