Feminism and women who can't do jobs men do but get paid the same

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Actually, where I am at, they will sometimes advertise for sign workers for road crews as a separate job, so it's not like they are part of the heavy labor road crew.

So not every road crew hired a woman who is light weight and is stuck on sign duty. Sometimes, the sign person was hired just to do that.

When I was in high school, it was something I thought of applying for as a summer job actually because I figured I could tolerate standing out in the sun for one summer holding a sign at the rate they were paying.

originally posted by: maria_stardust
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

This seems to be the root of your anger:

Obviously the solution should be to buy a $35,000 digger that can fit in between the trees and a $15-20,000 lift for trees to move them around, plant them and load them, right? Why are we so limited with having a $30 shovel and a $20 set of hay bail hooks? That is discrimination and sexist, oh, and not fair.

Lack of fancy, heavy lifting equipment is a business decision. Ultimately, it is cheaper for the boss to use cheaper manual labor, than shell out the big bucks to make YOUR job easier.

The premise that the fault lays with the woman running the register, and who assists with the manual labor as best she can is a false one.

If you wanted a lighter work load, then perhaps you should choose a different profession that requires a less strenuous set of skills. There’s always door greeting at Wal-Mart.

Wow, I can only hope that the rest of you near 20,000 posts are a little more insightful and accurate because if you were as wrong as you are in this response in the near 20,000 posts, then that is a $hit load of very bad analysis and misleading posts, just like this one. You seem to be the kind that projects their own feelings on others situations which may be why so many posts?

I admit not reading your post.

What about all the jobs that women do that men can't?

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

You should have come up with a better argument and a better example in your opening post.

Obviously the solution should be to buy a $35,000 digger that can fit in between the trees and a $15-20,000 lift for trees to move them around, plant them and load them, right? Why are we so limited with having a $30 shovel and a $20 set of hay bail hooks? That is discrimination and sexist, oh, and not fair.

The above example you gave is centered around a business decision to shore up the bottom line by keeping expenditures down by using menial labor versus investing in equipment to improve efficiency.

That has absolutely nothing to do with feminism, discrimination, sexism or any sense of fairness.

In all honesty, there are better arguments for this line of reasoning out there. Yours just doesn’t happen to be a shining example. Maybe next time try doing a little research and show up with facts that could shore up your logic instead of just whining. Then it wouldn’t be as easy for me to along and point out where you went astray.

Also, you would be able to come up a solid counter argument instead trying to stand tall with a flimsy, weak personal jab that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.