Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Are you woke enough?


Rob_Zepp

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

1. Prove it.

Prove the hate part and don’t twist the context. 

I love my transgender family members. There’s no hate here.

You have a dangerous mind and should temper your raging desire to label and judge the hearts of others as less virtuous than yours.

 

Lay off the SJW hero-mode crap if you want to discuss things like a normal person. 

 

What I don’t support is 220lb rugby players who identify as a woman, hammering the crap out of biological women, which was the point of ‘guys in dresses’ dominating the Olympics, if they chose to play that card... which was the point and context of the convo you’ve clearly not taken the time to read or understand, but brought into this because you have no point of your own. 

 

2. No. You ass u me. 

 

3. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze with you. Your intentions are that of a jaded person. 

I don’t, and didn’t imply you did. 

 

Your comprehension skills are terrible.

 

Debates and discussion can be stimulating on here when both sides are genuine and aren’t looking to deplatform or degrade the other person if they have no actual substance or point to make. Go throw $&!# at somebody else’s wall and hope it sticks. 

 

1. I have black friends; can I say unfair things about their race? That you have trans family members means nothing when you issue demeaning statements like that to diminish the identity of someone with gender dysphoria. A big part of my personal philosophy on life is that individuals deserve to define themselves; and when you say something like that, you're attacking their identity in a way that completely denies it. It's hate.

 

2. ok

 

3. I disagree. There are only a few posters on here who can actually tangle with me tbh. You don't realize the gigantism of my intellect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, HerrDrFunk said:

Judging by the attitudes you've displayed towards trans people here, I'm willing to bet if you actually have trans family members, they probably don't want much to do with you. You might love them but I don't believe you respect them based on what you've said in the past. Maybe I'm wrong but that's the impression I get.

 

Just for fun, I went and found the study with the most conservative results: https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap

 

In the controlled pay gap (which accounts for profession, qualifications, education, etc) women make $0.98 on the dollar. You might scoff at $0.02 but it adds up to the point where a women would make 49K while a man is making 50K to do the same job. 

XX and XY chromosomes are the sex and biological differences (facts) between men and women.

 

This is the context governing any of my comments about trans athletes and I hope it remains legal to, as far as I understand or perceive the issues as of today. It is an economy of words to refer to the iconic dress as the the female identify, which we can choose to take offence to or appreciate the traditional vehicle it becomes to move the conversation ahead, in fewer words than the PC climate expects. 

 

 

The Olympics and other sport orgs have rules for doping, like for steroids. 

Do I really need to explain why to anyone here? 

At times, I wonder. 

 

 

Currently, for the Olympics, a biological male (XY chromosomes) can’t shoot up with steroids, but he could and can enter a weight lifting competition against the other sex (XX chromosomes/ women) because this person ‘identifies’ as a women. 

 

I understand that an Olympian doing dope to gain an advantage in the Olympics is illegal, but a biological male can compete against biological women because this person feels/identifies as a woman.

 

Where did the level playing field go in the name of sportsmanship? It’s been replaced by something that I can’t endorse as a sports fan. 

 

I don’t think my daughter should be levelled in her sport by a ‘boy in a dress’, which is unlikely, but entirely possible right now, hence the hateful point. 

 

I could put on a dress, walk down to the Womens arm wrestling competition and do pretty good against my wife and her friends. Nobody could say a thing because how dare they question my fluidity or intentions, while I make my intended point about the biological differences/advantages between the sexes and Sport. My intentions are not important. Only the competition and biological advantage is, lest we suspect you of hate. 

 

Sex (science/DNA) and Gender (not going to apply any fixed term here as to not offend anyone) are not the same thing, yet the PC craze has even the Olympics and Olympians at its mercy. 

 

 

 

My attitudes towards trans peoples is pretty simple - don’t expect me to pay for your life decisions, feelings or anything to accommodate you in any way that’s different from the rest of us taxpayers.

 

Also, don’t expect me to alter my perception of science and reality to match yours beyond basic dignity is concerned. I will call my family members by their chosen pronouns out of compassion, but I will not be under any misapprehension about their chromosomes, which I take offence to when asked, yes.

 

Jordan Peterson covers my thoughts on this more articulately than I ever could. 

 

As for the wage gap, sorry but that didn’t at all answer my question. I suspect it’s because you have no personal experience regarding proof of the boogy man wage gap, in practice. I suspect some insincerity as well, but welcome you to change my opinion on why you went into a vicarious account/position instead of a simple answer of your own experience. No offence intended, of course, if that needs saying. 

 

These surveys and stats are all over the map. Let’s save each other the time and pretentiousness of dancing around the obvious, in that we know stats are not at all a clear science and are used to spin all sorts. Citing any stat seems like inviting endless discussion on variables and omissions. The wage gap stats are a legendary example of this. I think we all have seen the 

 

I’m not going to look at those links right now. Instead, I want to continue to ask for proof of the wage gap from readers in here. Please help me identify which employers are paying women less than men so I can defend my wife and daughters from such practices... 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

XX and XY chromosomes are the sex and biological differences (facts) between men and women.

 

This is the context governing any of my comments about trans athletes and I hope it remains legal to, as far as I understand or perceive the issues as of today. It is an economy of words to refer to the iconic dress as the the female identify, which we can choose to take offence to or appreciate the traditional vehicle it becomes to move the conversation ahead, in fewer words than the PC climate expects. 

 

 

The Olympics and other sport orgs have rules for doping, like for steroids. 

Do I really need to explain why to anyone here? 

At times, I wonder. 

 

 

Currently, for the Olympics, a biological male (XY chromosomes) can’t shoot up with steroids, but he could and can enter a weight lifting competition against the other sex (XX chromosomes/ women) because this person ‘identifies’ as a women. 

 

I understand that an Olympian doing dope to gain an advantage in the Olympics is illegal, but a biological male can compete against biological women because this person feels/identifies as a woman.

 

Where did the level playing field go in the name of sportsmanship? It’s been replaced by something that I can’t endorse as a sports fan. 

 

I don’t think my daughter should be levelled in her sport by a ‘boy in a dress’, which is unlikely, but entirely possible right now, hence the hateful point. 

 

I could put on a dress, walk down to the Womens arm wrestling competition and do pretty good against my wife and her friends. Nobody could say a thing because how dare they question my fluidity or intentions, while I make my intended point about the biological differences/advantages between the sexes and Sport. My intentions are not important. Only the competition and biological advantage is, lest we suspect you of hate. 

 

Sex (science/DNA) and Gender (not going to apply any fixed term here as to not offend anyone) are not the same thing, yet the PC craze has even the Olympics and Olympians at its mercy. 

 

 

 

My attitudes towards trans peoples is pretty simple - don’t expect me to pay for your life decisions, feelings or anything to accommodate you in any way that’s different from the rest of us taxpayers.

 

Also, don’t expect me to alter my perception of science and reality to match yours beyond basic dignity is concerned. I will call my family members by their chosen pronouns out of compassion, but I will not be under any misapprehension about their chromosomes, which I take offence to when asked, yes.

 

Jordan Peterson covers my thoughts on this more articulately than I ever could. 

 

As for the wage gap, sorry but that didn’t at all answer my question. I suspect it’s because you have no personal experience regarding proof of the boogy man wage gap, in practice. I suspect some insincerity as well, but welcome you to change my opinion on why you went into a vicarious account/position instead of a simple answer of your own experience. No offence intended, of course, if that needs saying. 

 

These surveys and stats are all over the map. Let’s save each other the time and pretentiousness of dancing around the obvious, in that we know stats are not at all a clear science and are used to spin all sorts. Citing any stat seems like inviting endless discussion on variables and omissions. The wage gap stats are a legendary example of this. I think we all have seen the 

 

I’m not going to look at those links right now. Instead, I want to continue to ask for proof of the wage gap from readers in here. Please help me identify which employers are paying women less than men so I can defend my wife and daughters from such practices... 

 

 

 

 

I wasn’t saying anything about sports, I was commenting on your complete lack of understanding and respect for trans people with your repeated “man in a dress” comments, which makes your claim of loving your trans family members highly dubious to me. 

 

If you’re not even going to look at the stats Jimmy and I provided, then we’re done here.

Edited by HerrDrFunk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 112 said:

1. I have black friends; can I say unfair things about their race? That you have trans family members means nothing when you issue demeaning statements like that to diminish the identity of someone with gender dysphoria. A big part of my personal philosophy on life is that individuals deserve to define themselves; and when you say something like that, you're attacking their identity in a way that completely denies it. It's hate.

 

2. ok

 

3. I disagree. There are only a few posters on here who can actually tangle with me tbh. You don't realize the gigantism of my intellect.

Better, IMO. 

You’re approach needs work. 

 

I’m not the model poster here which anyone here should aspire to be, but at least I can say that I’m not here looking to antagonize, label and misrepresent the posts and hearts of others. 

 

We all all suck at engaging each other in here from time to time. 

 

Sometimes it’s a disaster, but other times we connect and grow. I’ve pissed off all sorts here over the years and been pissed on just as much. Meh, progress... 

 

I’m often hammering out hurried posts and those comments can be offensive due to a lack of cushiony wording. I get it. Sometimes I comeback to defend my points, sometimes I can’t be bothered. It’s nothing personal, but rather time management.

 

I enjoy a stimulating discussion or debate, but rarely give my time to it any rely on others to continue to play connect-the-dots with the growing points in these threads, long after my drive-by shots are fired. Sometimes it works out, sometimes. It doesn’t. I’m sure this is the case for most of us. 

 

It’s those who seem like they are forced to surrender something more than a position in a debate which I least enjoy discussion with. The use of eye-rolly icons and the like make discussion less enjoyable, if I’m being perfectly honest. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

 

 

If you’re not even going to look at the stats Jimmy and I provided, then we’re done here.

I will eventually get to Jimmy, who I respect, later, thanks.

 

 

You’re done here? Lol...oh really... why’s that?

 

Because you can’t answer the simple, personal experience question that I asked, instead providing stats? 

 

(What spurred this is my asking for personal experiences of the posters in here in regards to the wage gap being employed where they work. I’ve never seen it in practice and have worked all over Canada in all sorts of industries, etc.)

 

What a waste of time. Don’t quote a person and dismiss them because you don’t like what’s being asked of you, you dang Time Vampire! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I will eventually get to Jimmy, who I respect, later, thanks.

 

 

You’re done here? Lol...oh really... why’s that?

 

Because you can’t answer the simple, personal experience question that I asked, instead providing stats? 

 

(What spurred this is my asking for personal experiences of the posters in here in regards to the wage gap being employed where they work. I’ve never seen it in practice and have worked all over Canada in all sorts of industries, etc.)

 

What a waste of time. Don’t quote a person and dismiss them because you don’t like what’s being asked of you, you dang Time Vampire! 

 

Cool. I’ve got plenty of anecdotal evidence I can post but anecdotal evidence is worth jack $&!# in the grand scheme. So we’re done until you want to stop being childish and actually look at some stats which might actually force you to think.

 

Peace.

Edited by HerrDrFunk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

Cool. I’ve got plenty of anecdotal evidence I can post but anecdotal evidence is worth jack $&!# in the grand scheme. So we’re done until you want to stop being childish and actually look at some stats which might actually force you to think.

 

Peace.

Back up. 

 

I asked a simple question about our own personal experiences. Pretty damn simple. 

 

You supplied a stat, a study, about coloured women, not your own experiences concerning you witnessing systemic wage gap practices at our employers. 

 

I’ve seen studies showing the opposite of the findings in the study you provided. This is a game we could both play like frisbee, and you know it. I don’t have time for that game. 

 

I’ve looked at all kinds of stats over the past few years. What I’m looking for isn’t stats, it’s a verifiable application of the wage gap, in practice, at our places of work. 

 

If you cant find me this boogy man where we work, why respond to my question?

 

You label me as childish for not accepting a study or stat as your personal experience and suspect that I am the one not engaged in critical thinking...?

 

Whatever, lesson learned, again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Back up. 

 

I asked a simple question about our own personal experiences. Pretty damn simple. 

 

You supplied a stat, a study, about coloured women, not your own experiences concerning you witnessing systemic wage gap practices at our employers. 

 

I’ve seen studies showing the opposite of the findings in the study you provided. This is a game we could both play like frisbee, and you know it. I don’t have time for that game. 

 

I’ve looked at all kinds of stats over the past few years. What I’m looking for isn’t stats, it’s a verifiable application of the wage gap, in practice, at our places of work. 

 

If you cant find me this boogy man where we work, why respond to my question?

 

You label me as childish for not accepting a study or stat as your personal experience and suspect that I am the one not engaged in critical thinking...?

 

Whatever, lesson learned, again. 

First, that study was about women, regardless of ethnicity, but did break things down by ethnicity later in the study. You'd know that if you actually bothered to read it. 

 

Second, "coloured women"? You can &^@# off now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

First, that study was about women, regardless of ethnicity, but did break things down by ethnicity later in the study. You'd know that if you actually bothered to read it. 

 

Second, "coloured women"? You can &^@# off now

The title reads Women of Colour, not, and oops, (how hateful of me) Coloured women... 

 

https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap

 

Edit:

included the link you provided which I misnamed... oh the horror. 

 

Looks like I just won an argument against a Liberal... :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

The title reads Women of Colour, not, and oops, (how hateful of me) Coloured women... 

 

https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap

 

Edit:

included the link you provided which I misnamed... oh the horror. 

 

Looks like I just won an argument against a Liberal... :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You’re absolutely not worth explaining the history and difference in what you said versus what was in the study.

 

Congratu-&^@#ing-lations there, bud. Take a bow.

Edited by HerrDrFunk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

 

 

 

at about the 1:45 mark the awkward, cringe compilation begins. 

That was incompetence at its finest. All the senator had to do was ask if they took into account how many hours were worked, and instead of being honest, the two women fumbled around spouting off statistics they didnt even understand in the first place. 

 

Complete buffoons, wage gap or not. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2019 at 9:43 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

I know from our discussions in the past that you're open to facts. The wage gap is a real thing, it exists.

 

You can get the unfiltered info from StatsCan: 

 

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-28-0001/2018001/article/00010-eng.htm

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/statistics-canada-gender-pay-gap-1.4014954

 

Thanks for the links.

 

I have made the fatal logic-flaw of equating Wage with Earnings.

 

Each stat provided cite earnings, which isn’t the same thing as wage, is it.

 

So why call it a Wage Gap? Or pay gap? 

 

I earn more than my wife, but she is paid more per hour; there is a wage gap between us. No complaints there.

 

If she wasn’t busy enjoying being a mom and working part time, there’d be an “earnings gap” between us, as well as a wage gap. 

 

This greasy flaw in the SJW-language used to prop up the division politics is intentionally deceitful. 

 

There appears to be no wage gap at all in these stats, but rather a clear lack of earning opportunities for women, biological women I assume (shout-out to the increasing complexities). There are reasons for this unrelated to oppresion in the workforce. 

 

My wife will not make manager at her job because she is part-time. When the hateful man becomes manager, it’s not because of systemic oppression, but rather because of her ineligibility based on her availability as a permanent, part-time worker. 

 

Women account for the bulk of part-time workers, 3x more, according to those Australian stats in the cringe video I posted.

 

Again, not because of the oppressive patriarchy and not because their employers are enjoying using the cheap labour the Wage Gap supporters would have us believe. Part-timers earn less than full-timers and career advancement plays a massive role here as well. 

 

I’m not going down this road any further to explain the social cohesion benefits or issues associated with the career choices women like my wife make, sacrifices in her case. I will leave that alone in this thread. 

 

Until I find proof of Tim Horton’s, Walmart’s, Starbucks, Government of BC, Tolko, Suncore, etc etc of paying less of a “wage” to women, I will remain as skeptical of the intention of these stats as I am of those who would present them to show the oppression of women in our society. 

 

IMO, there is no wage gap.

There is an earnings gap derived from personal choice. 

 

There is no oppresion or a boogy man here who underpays women, but rather the choices and preferences of women. 

 

Pay/wages and Earnings are not not the same thing. These stats cite earnings. Pretty easy to connect the dots as to why moms might earn less than fathers, in our society. 

 

Thanks for the stats, but they do not clearly indicate that women are paid less money or wages to do the same job as men by the dastardly Patriarchy. Women are not disadvantaged or oppressed here. Let’s stop there. 

 

Somewhere out there is an outlier about women being paid less, there has to be, and we should be looking for that employer, not at these stats looking at earnings.

 

I hope someone reading this can attest to seeing the application of the wage gap out there, which would be an interesting topic instead of propping up this misinformation, packaged as identify politics meant to divide.

 

IMO, there is no value in these stats other than to show that women have consequences for their career choices. It’s unfortunate that when they take a break to raise us, they are punished economically, career-wise. That, I agree with. 

 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MystifyNCrucify said:

That was incompetence at its finest. All the senator had to do was ask if they took into account how many hours were worked, and instead of being honest, the two women fumbled around spouting off statistics they didnt even understand in the first place. 

 

Complete buffoons, wage gap or not. 

Glad you chose to watch that video.

It tackles the misinformation. 

 

The presenters were so entrenched in their desire and belief in the misinformation that they couldn’t rationally respond to the Senators points, eventually agreeing to take his comments and requests to come back with the actual facts concerning earnings vs wages.

 

That video was quite the awkward few minutes of watching someone get caught lying, like you say, wage gap, or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I especially loved the part when she says “Well sitting at a desk for 12 hours doesnt mean you get 12 hours of productivity.”

 

Not sure where she was going with that. Men are lazy? Sure some are. No more than women though. Women can complete in 8 hours what a man needs 12 for? Dont think gender has anything to do with skill and competence. 

 

It was very cringey. Five women on the panel, only two spoke, looked like the one to the blondes left was mentally face palming. Five of them, and their best argument for the wage gap was “women should get the same salary as men because men are stupid and lazy and women are much more efficient and smarter”.

 

Maybe thats true. Certainly wasnt the case with that brain trust though. 

Edited by MystifyNCrucify
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MystifyNCrucify said:

I especially loved the part when she says “Well sitting at a desk for 12 hours doesnt mean you get 12 hours of productivity.”

 

Not sure where she was going with that. Men are lazy? Sure some are. No more than women though. Women can complete in 8 hours what a man needs 12 for? Dont think gender has anything to do with skill and competence. 

Yep. Desperate measures. 

She went there.

 

I hope others watch the video and learn something about the misinformation and this mislabeled data being used to spin a political agenda out of thin air. 

 

Watch the video, people. 

 

 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Yep. Desperate measures. 

She went there.

 

I hope others watch the video and learn something about the misinformation and mislabeled data being used to spin a political agenda out of thin air. 

 

Waych the video, people. 

 

 

The senator was actually very patient. Never even denied a so called “wage gap”. He just asked if they took into account hours worked and the women just looked at each other in disbelief. Was as if hours worked had never come up in their conversations. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Thanks for the links.

 

I have made the fatal logic-flaw of equating Wage with Earnings.

 

Each stat provided cite earnings, which isn’t the same thing as wage, is it.

 

So why call it a Wage Gap? Or pay gap? 

 

I earn more than my wife, but she is paid more per hour; there is a wage gap between us. No complaints there.

 

If if she wasn’t busy enjoying being a mom and working part time, there’d be an “earnings gap” between us, as well as a wage gap. 

 

This greasy flaw in the SJW-language used to prop up the division politics is intentionally deceitful. 

 

There appears to be no wage gap at all in these stats, but rather a clear lack of earning opportunities for women, biological women I assume (shout-out to the increasing complexities). There are reasons for this unrelated to oppresion in the workforce. 

 

My wife will not make manager at her job because she is part-time. When the hateful man becomes manager, it’s not because of systemic oppression, but rather because of her ineligibility based on her availability as a permanent, part-time worker. 

 

Women account for the bulk of part-time workers, 3x more, according to those Australian stats in the cringe video I posted.

 

Again, not because of the oppressive patriarchy and not because their employers are enjoying using the cheap labour the Wage Gap supporters would have us believe. Part-timers earn less than full-timers and career advancement plays a massive role here as well. 

 

I’m not going down this road any further to explain the social cohesion benefits or issues associated with the career choices women like my wife make, sacrifices in her case. I will leave that alone in this thread. 

 

Until I find proof of Tim Horton’s, Walmart’s, Starbucks, Government of BC, Tolko, Suncore, etc etc of paying less of a “wage” to women, I will remain as skeptical of the intention of these stats as I am of those who would present them to show the oppression of women in our society. 

 

IMO, there is no wage gap.

There is an earnings gap derived from personal choice. 

 

There is no oppresion or a boogy man here who underpays women, but rather the choices and preferences of women. 

 

Pay/wages and Earnings are not not the same thing. These stats cite earnings. Pretty easy to connect the dots as to why moms might earn less than fathers, in our society. 

 

Thanks for the stats, but they do not clearly indicate that women are paid less money or wages to do the same job as men by the dastardly Patriarchy. Women are not disadvantaged or oppressed here. Let’s stop there. 

 

Somewhere out there is an outlier about women being paid less, there has to be, and we should be looking for that employer, not at these stats looking at earnings.

 

I hope someone reading this can attest to seeing the application of the wage gap out there, which would be an interesting topic instead of propping up this misinformation, packaged as identify politics meant to divide.

 

IMO, there is no value in these stats other than to show that women have consequences for their career choices. It’s unfortunate that when they take a break to raise us, they are punished economically, career-wise. That, I agree with. 

 

yeah I think you've got it correct talking about earnings. In the statscan work on it, they tried to correct for all of the kinds of variables you're talking about and it looks that there is still an 8% difference in earnings. I think most people would agree with the thought thats not fair and something that should be corrected. 

 

It helps to go to things like statscan for the real info, and leave the inflammatory language for others to debate on social media. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...