New gender gap index shows men most disadvantaged

[Imnobody4]

The backlash continues, I'm starting to get really scared now.

<a class="break-all" href="https://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-heres-what-happens-when-the-gender-gap-index-is-adjusted-for-bias#click=t.co/rvRvZNbSl2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-heres-what-happens-when-the-gender-gap-index-is-adjusted-for-bias#click=t.co/rvRvZNbSl2
Entitled “A Simplified Approach to Measuring National Gender Inequality,” authors Gijsbert Stoet from the U.K.’s University of Essex, and David C. Geary from the University of Missouri, contend that the GGGI is unreliable, because it is “biased to highlight women’s issues.” They argue that the GGGI does not measure men’s areas of disadvantage, such as compulsory military service, harsher punishments for the same crime, and workplace deaths — 95 per cent male.

By definition, they say, the GGGI “excludes the possibility that men can be less well off than women – this is because the GGGI focuses on women’s advancement.” As well, they contend that the GGGI uses indicators that are only relevant to elite women, and that the GGGI includes indicators more reflective of choice than of discrimination.

The researchers propose a truly gender-neutral set of metrics for calculating equality scores, named the Basic Index of Gender Inequality (BIGI). BIGI focuses on three factors: educational opportunities (literacy, years of primary and secondary education), healthy life expectancy (years expected to live in good health), and overall life satisfaction which, taken together, are the “minimum ingredients of a good life.”
Stoet and Geary calculated BIGI scores over five years (2012 through 2016) for 134 nations, representing 6.8 billion people. They relied on GGGI reports published by the World Economic Forum and the Gallup World Poll for data. To their surprise, they found that using the BIGI as a yardstick, men are on average disadvantaged in 91 countries, while women are disadvantaged in 43 countries, most of them economically under-developed. Sometimes the deviations from parity are quite small or even negligible, as for example in the case of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Turkey, China and Switzerland.

Because you're the one coming on to a feminist board WATMing. And now you're doing that verbal manspread thing again, insisting that you great gollomping opinions have every right to squat where ever you decide to put them.

The inability of posters like yourself to see how this kind of entitlement posting puts our backs up is precisely why you're not going to get why we would be discussing this in the first place, or why your opinions aren't relevant.

I think you are too personally invested in this forum going by your extremely territorial attitude. It's a place intended for discussion and giving my opinion is perfectly acceptable and within the site rules.

Actually lol.

Have at it, bloke. Stun all the women here with your insight. They'll be ever so grateful. Honest.

I used to see this cartoon around a lot at one time. You're not even original.

They'll be ever so grateful

Im not sure grateful is the word i would have gone for

Jolly sporting of you though floral

Rufus, I am a sporting old bird. Although I really should stop being so territorial and pissing in the corners of the radicalization portal, it's going to leave stains.

floral

Do you know what ive always wondered

Ive heard people say that if there is urine on a toilet seat its better to wipe and sit rather than hover as a healthy adults wee is sterile

But how do i know they were a healthy adult?

I remember hearing wee is sterile and wondering what on earth the applications of that were.

There is less bacteria in urine than tap water

Apparently

I haven't actually tested it

And i read that to stop dog wee from turning the grass yellow you should give the dog tomato ketchup

Maybe you should have some to stop the staining

Feminism is about equality of the sexes, hence the common argument that it's also good for men and that 'egalitarianism' is unnecessary.

I don't see how I'm not on topic.

Aye, lad, keep at it. You should probably know that telling us what feminism is about will probably go down as well as a cup of cold sick, though.

The definition on here seems to be different from some other places. The 'liberation of women' isn't the same as striving for 'equality between the sexes'.

I do appreciate that one could say that liberating women may achieve equality of the sexes, but I don't understand people saying that egalitarianism isn't needed due to feminism.

Why would men want to be treated as equal to women? Why would men need abortion rights?
Real actual feminism is a moment for the liberation and autonomy of women.

Most forums require people to read some FAQ's and guidelines before they start posting, lets try these;

Feminist Faq's
finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/the-faqs/faq-roundup/

Wait, userschmoozer, you want to deny men the right to have access to abortions? Now that‘s cruel. What will be next, you mean bastard? You‘re going to deny men the right to be pregnant?

I am with Egg here. Now that feminism has achieved women‘s vote and the right of women to own property and to get a job without hubby‘s permission - what can feminism do for men? For balance,‘ya know.

deepwatersolo Well what does your hubby say?

Also, we‘re always talking voting rights. You always only look the small, successful proportion of men, when you moan about women being disadvantaged. You know how many men don‘t cast a vote —cause they can‘t be arsed—. What about them?

I shall endeavour to read that link.

A quick perusal of 'what can men do' shows I'm evidently on the right track.

Men such as ourselves, men with a concern for men’s issues and a sympathy for feminism, should be trying as hard as possible to take up space in the public arena.

Yeah, Egg, but I am pretty sure whining to feminists on a feminism board about what they should do for men is not what was meant by ‚take up space in the public arena‘. It may seem like the natural thing, demanding mummy fix it, but at some point post-toddlerhood, it ain‘t no winning strategy no more.

As for the urine-thing: you‘d first need to establish the urine is clear and not turbid. The idea that urine is always sterile is laughable, let alone the fact that even in sterile urine micro organisms already on the seat can flourish - and are probably more efficiently transferred.

Few men have done more for men than feminist Jessica Eaton has done for men (as I said earlier), but bafflingly, the info was greeted by tumbleweed.
And what about Rape Crisis and Womens Aid, who are now mixed sex, but almost entirely staffed and funded by women?

What are the men on this thread doing for men or for women? Not 'raising awareness', (we side with Doug Stanhope on that one)

Doug Stanhope: Fun run for nothing and raising awareness

And there it is again; silence. If you ask me they are misusing Grey Rock.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

raises hand I’ve done volunteering in suicide prevention, and other areas. Good posts egg! Given that you aren’t being presented with anything close to an actual argument to the discussion at hand, and rather insinuations that you have no right to participate and memes about men’s opinions I’d say you are onto something, and you may well be convincing the odd person who is lurking I’d say good for you!

I’ll try to see if there is any chance of any bridging ground I think everyone agrees that motherhood is one of the biggest factors against pay parity, and that also spending time with your children is good for both you and them (irrespective of wether it’s fathers or mothers we are talking about). I agree that making companies accomadate makes those businesses less competitive globally and impedes barrier to entry.

What I’d propose instead is that childcare, especially early years childcare becomes a profession like doctor/lawyer that requires high levels of training and qualifications to be able to enter? Considering how important childcare is, I am not comfortable with this race to the bottom in terms of cost. By all means we can socialise the cost of this collectively which means taxes would need to go up (I can live with that), but I’d rather buisinesses were more viable and efficient to generate the wealth to make it possible.

If some couples choose to have a stay at home parent then I think a massive tax rebate paid directly in the name of the sahp might go someway to changing the culture of seeing childcare as economically invisisble.

ou may well be convincing the odd person

Yes they would have to be fairly odd to be convinced....

Bit rude calling people odd though