Friday, May 13, 2011

It does get worse for women who want to have children

According to a recent study by students from three Ivy League Universities--Harvard, Columbia and New York Universities--women's income deeply decline when having their bundle of joy.

The study reveals, not-shockingly, but ironically, that the true cost of motherhood for low-skilled and high-skilled women is comparable, given the social status of each. Motherhood, like womanhood comes in a second class box, but still a box!


Specifically, the study asserts that:

  • "Low-skilled women don’t get very big raises, and having kids does little to change that.The so-called wage trajectories (think of a line graph showing a worker’s wages growing over time) of low-skilled women are much flatter than those of high-skilled women. Having children didn’t change those trajectories very much. 
  • For high-skilled women, kids spell the end of raises. High-skilled women have steep wage trajectories. Those trajectories flatten out almost precisely at the moment they have children. 
  • Low-skilled women don’t seem to make their lost wages back. Ten years after having children, low-skilled women have wages that are six percent lower than their counterparts. 
  • High-skilled women don’t make that money back, either. Ten years after having children, high-skilled women have wages that are 24 percent lower than their counterparts. 

Becoming a mother, not a father, seems to make a huge difference in this gender unequal America. Why? Because even now men still are untouched by this disparity. According to the study becoming a father does not have an effect on the man's wages. Do women really have it as good as they think we do, or is this all part of the Matrix created by men to keep women in our place? Hidden misogyny, or overt? Thoughts?
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, May 8, 2011

The AVN (American Adult Industry) Awards

That's Not My Name: Beating Down Online MisogynyImage by allaboutgeorge via Flickr
Could there be anything more repugnant than the AVN Awards? If women do not see realize what this is presently doing to them and eventually doing to millions of women around the world, then what gives!

Most men have "used" women as their servant, wives, sexual objects, etc., all in the  name of "loving women." Is this really loving us, or hating us?

Recently Hugh Hefner said last year that women, indeed, "are sex objects." This man, the owner of PlayBoy magazine, has been criticized for decades for his treatment of women. By stating that "women are sex objects," Hefner devalues women's worth and further places women in a category of an object that you can use, abuse, throw to the side, and dispose of at his convenience. Why do we stand for this? Are we (women) so concerned about not being liked that we stay quiet? What would you do if your daughter was a "Playmate?" If you looked at the PlayMate website, you would be horrified.

If you were a father, would you like to see your daughter receive an AVN Award? Or, would you rather have your daughter be an attorney, a doctor, a lawmaker, etc. Do you care?

The companies that sponsored this event should be called upon and not supported, not if you cared about our girl and women in America. The Palms Casino Resort, the owner of this event AVN Media Networks and any company that paid for it is a company that supports misogyny. Have you ever wondered why are women's bodies exploited and men's bodies hidden and revered? Perhaps the answer lies in the saying "size does matter" and allowing millions of women to realize the reality behind the saying may open up their eyes in a larger way. If there are adult TV shows depicting the penis, they make sure that it is a large penis, otherwise you're cut from it, no pun intended.
Enhanced by Zemanta