Does this thought belong here?

kempff · 2014-07-27T06:45:02+00:00

Women working outside the home creates jobs for the birth control industry, the childcare industry, the school security industry, the domestic attourney industry, the mental health industry, and the geriatric care industry.

mordanus · 2014-07-27T05:19:09+00:00

There was a really good video about that a while ago. It basically explained that the reason that feminism started getting traction in the first place was because big business saw the merit in basically doubling the amount of employees they could choose from. This would allow them to have a better hiring market which makes them able to work their employees harder and pay them less. That's why feminism got so much air time and such because someone saw they could make a buck off of the movement.

ashglass · 2014-07-27T09:05:04+00:00

Personally I think that's a bit extreme because I believe women and men should all be able to work and make money for themselves. (of course still realizing that men and men excel in different types of jobs). That's like saying "Well maybe if the blacks weren't allowed to get jobs then there'd be more jobs for white people!"

jamieoneal82 · 2014-07-27T14:25:10+00:00

More people working means more products being created while simultaneously more income being generated. Production creates demand, demand causes production. It balances out so it's not a zero sum game like that.

Check out lump of labor fallacy.

Jerry_Cherry · 2014-07-27T15:45:59+00:00

One of the biggest differences between the job market now and 60 years ago is the extreme decrease in jobs that require physical labor. Now the market demands many more communication-based jobs, which women are generally better at than men. I don't think there could really be an "if women just stayed home" scenario. The job market required more people with strong communication skills. Some men could and did adapt to that, but based on the number of unemployed construction workers, factory workers, and other people in physically-based jobs, a lot of those people aren't able to adapt. So no, that scenario simply wouldn't work.

FortunateBum · 2014-07-27T23:49:38+00:00

Historically this was one of the arguments many employers made when they wouldn't hire women for certain jobs and/or pay men more.

It was once believed that part of the social contract was to help fathers support their families. It was understood that wives' income was supplemental.

That you think this is a crazy backward thought shows just how far feminism has changed thinking in employment.

According to the lump of labor fallacy this doesn't matter, but I've never believed it was a fallacy.

mrp3anut · 2014-07-27T23:54:48+00:00

This is a lot more complicated that just less women working = more men working.

I would focus more on what type of work is being done and what skills and education those jobs require. You will find that most college educated people have absolutely no marketable skills that set them apart from every other person with a bullshit degree thus they cannot possess any power in the labor market since their employer can replace them easily.

Hughtub · 2014-07-28T04:45:26+00:00

I'm firmly convinced that women working has been a net negative. Any woman I've worked with has been literally about 1/2 as slow as a normal, healthy, fit, decently smart, competent male. The dynamics of only men in a workplace leads to hyper efficiency, competition and drive to get things done. With women, we naturally slow down and if we like some female co-workers, there's going to be a lot of wasted small talk and just overall less focus. Compare the work ethic of a normal woman. I love women, but they do not belong in competition with men (whch is what most jobs involve). Many corporations have found makeshift work for pretty girls such as in ads and marketing/sales, but that's only because pussy men are the default in the home, and women spend more of the money. Women working AND spending most of the money drives the demand for makeshift jobs and the rise of marketing over function. Men want to know if a thing works, and don't care about something that is on a thing that does nothing. Women are more interested in the appearance than functionality. 2 very different worldviews.

Title	Does this thought belong here?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	1
Comments	9
Date	July 27, 2014 5:05 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2bu68z/does_this_thought_belong_here/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/does-this-thought-belong-here.18515 https://theredarchive.com/post/18515

Comments