So I initially put this article on Blogster.com but am very dissatisfied with the results there. It is so dead! Not to mention, holy crap, literally look at
the takeover by the religious Reich! I
cannot believe it!

I cannot believe I am the most popular article and
get two responses one from sweet martin and one from another blogger over here
and no one other than Martian wrote anything I could respond to so I decided to
repost it over here.

I do want my blogs read so I want them spidered by Google
and they will not do that with duplicate articles , so, I am going to rewrite
it and include my answers to Martin in it ad change my wording just a bit.

Okay my good friend East Kentucky Progressive has
managed to raise my ire, again, as adorable as he is he is very good at getting
my panties in a wad.

He did it with is article, Republicans
Block Equal Pay for Women, which I completely disagree with. I believe it is asking for a hand out as well
as attempting to make women look like a deserved minority which they are not. (you
know there is software that will do this, wish I had me some)

Now let’s first talk about this woman the “Measure”
was named after Lilly Ledbetter. So according to this
article she worked for Goodyear for over two decades and did not realize she
was getting paid less than her male counterparts? Let me tell you if it were a
man and he found out he were getting less than a woman he would have cried hard
got the raise or been gone. Now would
you not think that sometime during those two decades she might have found out
that the guys were getting paid more? If not by them dropping hints,
outright telling her, letting hints slip or at the very least seeing the
difference in their standard of living? Why wait until now? Seemed like
prime time to get a fat lawsuit, I mean after two decades she did not have to
worry about any repercussions from work whether her claim be true or not she
could just add it to her retirement? If she was going to sue two decades
is too long to wait. You see the nice thing about jobs is you pick where
you live and where you work. If she did not like the fact that she felt
she was being under paid this is when you get a new job even if she had to
relocate. Do you not think this would have looked nice on a Resume, the
fact that she worked for Goodyear? They did not make her stay two
decades, she chose to and also chose less pay by doing so. That is the
nice thing about America,
you get to choose. Had she disagreed so
strongly with her pay she should have quit then and filed a lawsuit, in the
first six months of said pay discrepancy and that is what the law a allows. Not
only do I think the law is fair I agree with it fully.

Some people think men and women
should be viewed equally in the workforce and there is a reason they are not
and should not be. First and foremost being that woman have babies and leave
for maternity leave to have said babies, take off work if they are single moms
or take off work instead of their husbands to take care of said children when
they are ill or for various other reasons they MUST take off work for their
kids. Employers do not and should not have to hire these ladies over a
man, hell, often times they will take a man with less qualifications over the
problems they will inherit. Is it fair? YES. That job belongs to the employer, not the
employee he can choose what person he wishes to give that job to based on the
risk said person presents to him and women are a bigger expense i.e. a bigger employment
risk.

We as women know when we have
children be it with our husband or some guy we never intend to see again at a
bar that we will most likely be the primary care givers of any children should
our relationship end. We are aware of that before we have sex even if we
had no intention of getting pregnant or later divorced, We as women, made a choice then, when we decided to have
children and again when we made a choice
to be the custodial parent. Should an employer be expected to pay for the
choices we made that while may have made us a superior parent made us an
inferior employee?

This is a huge reason women are
paid less than men. Women cost a hell of a lot more to employ. Their bad
behavior has been proven by taking jobs just to get the benefits then leaving
it after their maternity leave is up. I
say proven because their have been
studies done about this and what about the women not so long ago, in the last
ten years who enlisted in the Army and once were deployed to either wars or
other overseas locations got pregnant so they would not have to go?

What about the chick who gets a
job as a welder but because she is not strong enough to lift the huge spools of
metal she needs to weld, gets a man to lift them for her so she get back to
welding, should she get the same pay as her male welding counterpart who did not
need to use someone else’s time, time he was being paid for and not being paid
to lift her spool?

These are prime examples of why
men are more valuable in the workforce.

Should women get equal pay for equal
work? Well, only if it is equal and if
it is not she has the right to sue in the first six months or she can just get
a different job that will pay her what she wants.

So now you say that we, women “are a second class citizen to the old rich white
guy republican party” *coughs*
Bullshit!

The people spouting this rhetoric need to look at
the education trends:

Between 1970 and 2000, the overall number of women
enrolled in postsecondary institutions grew by 136%, while their numbers in
professional school grew by a whopping 853%.

In 2004, 9.9 million women were attending the
nation's accredited postsecondary schools, compared to only 7.4 million men.

Do you doubt that this trend will
and has put women in the very positions that decide the pay for not only the
very women that are “discriminated against” but men as well?

So why are we blaming the “rich
republicans’?

As this trend continues and more
and more women assume power positions we will soon only have ourselves to
blame, In fact I already believe we only have ourselves to blame because women
already hold these positions and have held more and more since 1970. Not only
that women are willing to bow down and take it instead of relocating their
family for a better job or doing anything that might be “hard” for them
instead we are trained to scream “discrimination” and hope for a hand out from
the fat white guys.

Now after all of that I had comments
from Martin as well as Elkhound but I accidentally deleted yours but do not know
how I did that elkhound but I remember the gist of what you said:
What about the single career women?? Why is she being punished?
Why is she being punished? If she was fool
enough to stay at a place that is underpaying her then she is punishing herself.
She can offer her skills to someone who will appreciate her.
And why should she run and not stay and fight if it is a job she
likes?
Do you really think she is going to like
the job after she takes them to court? It does not matter where this company is she can find another where they
will do her right. The best way to “punish”
an employer is through the pocket book and if all the good candidates go
somewhere lese because of you practices in the end you will lose.
Why shouldn't a capable woman fight the "Good Old Man's
club"?
They do every day Martian why should
perfectly capable women be made made to be seen as victims with a law?
And business's pay for alcoholic male employees, for men
harrassing women sexually on the job, etc., but they are not punished by
making less money than the women with children.
This is not apples to apples this is
apples to oranges this is not about sexual harassment but sex discrimination
which are two different things entirely. I do not see the correlation.
In brais, itelligence and logic women are the equal of men and
should be paid the equal of men.
That is true but women think differently
than men and their priorities are different? Which is why you see much fewer
single Dads and why men pay the fat child support.
Women in power??? Come on--the figures alone show you how small
they are compared to men. How many women billionaires, millionaires are there
compared to men--except maybe the women (Walmart, Heinz, etc.,) who have
inherited it.??
Okay do tell me in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s
and even the 90’s how many women who actually had a chance of winning ran in
elections for president? I may not like Hillary
but it does show how far we have come. Through those years how many Supreme
Court justices, how many females graduated law school? Over those years show me how many registered
female lawyers their were for each decade and medical doctors who were
female. You do the research, see a
trend? Every single year women take over
more and more jobs that were traditionally men’s.
How many female s hold high political offices
now, compare that to the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. A huge trend?
You show me over those years how many female
millionaires there were first in the 70’s, 80’s then the 90’s. A trend, no?
Why do you want to, now, after all the achievements
of men give us a special law that will brand us as second class citizens when
the time line proves we will take over anyway through sheer determination?
Instead we can thank our special treatment by the government instead of our perseverance
and strength.
With your comment, “How many women billionaires, millionaires
are there compared to men--except maybe the women (Walmart, Heinz, etc.,) who
have inherited it.??”I feel you discriminate against women and see
them as second class citizens.
You really don't think women should get equal pay for equal
work???
If they do equal work of course they
deserve equal pay. See above.
The gist of what elkhound said was why should women be punished
for their bodies for having kids and relocation is unreasonable if you are a lower
middle class family(let me know if I got that right)
Well my answer is simple and you may not
like it. Every woman has the opportunity
in the country to have any job she chooses. The problem is that other choices women make can keep them from these
jobs, like having kids.

If you choose to have kids before you
finish college in most cases you will not finish, that’s just a fact. If you chose to be a parent before you
battled for your position in a company you probably will not end up there. You
chose to be a parent which is a full time job and should be applauded and it is
a shame men are let off the hook so easily in this country and child support is
so low without consideration for the special needs of children. While I do not support this law I believe that
men should be held accountable not only to the child but to the mother of the
child in terms of financial support because women have so much more to do than
provide money. Children are huge time consumers and it is for this very reason
that employers should not be expected to take up the slack. Why should an employer hire you to be his
executive assistant, someone he needs at his side constantly, knowing you will
leave him to take your kid to the doctor and quite possibly during that
important meeting?
Why should an employer choose you over a
man who does not have any obligations or even another woman who is over 40 and
has no children? There is no reason, you are a risk.
You did not just happen to get pregnant
you chose to when you decided to have sex. Life did not just happen to you. You happened.
As far as being a lower middle class
family the choices should have been made before you became a family.

Anymore questions? Anyone?