It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fox does it again..women should not ruin the oscars by asking for equal rights.

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

It goes with the territory really. Once people get famous they get a false sense that people actually care about what they think. That is why you get these overly politicized speeches at the Oscars.

I hate awards shows. It's an entire genre of television programming catered to making the egotistic assholes who make that very entertainment more egotistic. To be honest, I don't care what they talk about on those things as I don't watch them anyways.




posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Once people get famous they get a false sense that people actually care about what they think.


Clearly, there are a lot of people who DO care what they have to say, or we wouldn't even be hearing about it. For some strange reason, many people care.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Clearly, there are a lot of people who DO care what they have to say, or we wouldn't even be hearing about it. For some strange reason, many people care.

It is quite interesting as to how many people seem to care what a beneficiary of massive income inequality feels about minor income inequality...but, c'est la vie!



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: f4rwest
The argument isnt if women should have equal rights, of course they should. it's if the theoscars is an appropriate platform to bring it up.
Once again I am astonished of how seriously you PC freaks take yourselves. All types of events are ruined by people using their platform making political statements.
Anyone swayed or feels empowered by what a little celebrity says is weak anyways.

Some sympathy with that, although I would disagree with people who can be inspired by what others say are weak..anyway who says the Oscars were ruined?
Going back, United Artists was a rebellion against artistic control by the big studios of the time...arguably the buzzword then was educational and not educatering, nothing to do with PC so much, and there was probably a lot more old crap under the radar...and it looks like there still is...it's people speaking out.
edit on 23-2-2015 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: InfinityandBeyond
Where is this unequal pay? Plenty of woman who work at my place of business make more than I do. I always read "woman should make money equally" but where are these places?


It's all over really. My wife makes less than the other "men" in her department. A lot less for equal work and equal experience.


There is no such thing as equal experience, just because two people have the same 10 years in a given industry doesn't mean that their experience and competence level is equivalent. Even holding the same job title in the same company doesn't mean you have equal experience.

I'm not saying it's OK to pay women less for doing the same job, but I am saying it's impossible to accurately compare two people's worth, and that the reason people make a certain amount is based on many complex factors.

Every job I've had I made more than some in my department, and less than others in my department, doing the exact same job. All were men, so gender bias wasn't an issue, so what accounts of the large variance in pay between men doing the same job? I guess we don't care about employees getting screwed over unless they are women, right?



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Onslaught2996

OH THE HORROR! It's those damned evil Republicans yet again!

Hillary Clinton’s War on Women


Hillary Clinton portrays herself as a champion of women in the workforce, but women working for her in the U.S. Senate were paid 72 cents for each dollar paid to men, according to a Washington Free Beacon analysis of her Senate years’ salary data.

During those years, the median annual salary for a woman working in Clinton’s office was $15,708.38 less than the median salary for a man, according to the analysis of data compiled from official Senate expenditure reports.


Your blind partisanship is duly noted!



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420
It is quite interesting as to how many people seem to care what a beneficiary of massive income inequality feels about minor income inequality...but, c'est la vie!


1. The term "Income inequality" does not pertain to equal pay for men and women.
2. You're right. For some strange reason, many care what famous people think. Theirs is the same as anyone else's opinion to me.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
1. The term "Income inequality" does not pertain to equal pay for men and women.

As long as people are foolish enough to believe your statement, income inequality (of any kind) will always be present.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Onslaught2996

More like people get sick and tired of everything being political. Can't we watch the Oscars, ever, without someone's political ax coming out to grind?

Whatever happened to just getting through an event and enjoying it?

We can't even watch a freakin' football game anymore without risking this:



You want to know why society is so heavily politicized and divided and we can't just pull together and set things aside? Maybe it's this and things like this that are a major contributor. You can't watch anything without politics in it and a heavy-handed message.



Why do we have to live in an environment where even if you don't want to deal with something, it's thrust into your face?

Now, I'm not saying whether or not the cause in question is just or valid, but do we need to always be subjected to it ... everywhere?




posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
... but do we need to always be subjected to it ... everywhere?

Yes. It is extremely easy to keep the plebs distracted when the focus is on social justice.

There is no way to win a game if you are unaware of the field, the rules, or the very nature of the game you are playing.

So, 'they' will play a numbers game, and 'we' will spin in circles playing social justice games, wondering why we never come out on top of the numbers game.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Once people get famous they get a false sense that people actually care about what they think. That is why you get these overly politicized speeches at the Oscars.


The Oscars are no longer an award show in the terms you put it, as just a gong award... they may have been at some time.
Even the host had a dig/s at the Oscar college itself. It has become feck all to do with egoism.

edit on 23-2-2015 by smurfy because: Text.

edit on 23-2-2015 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: peck420

Shhh, don't tell anyone on this thread that they will never achieve true social justice because it's impossible.

1. They won't believe you.
2. They like endlessly chasing their tails.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
1. The term "Income inequality" does not pertain to equal pay for men and women.

As long as people are foolish enough to believe your statement, income inequality (of any kind) will always be present.


BH answered you correctly in the vein you put it,

"It is quite interesting as to how many people seem to care what a beneficiary of massive income inequality feels about minor income inequality...but, c'est la vie!"



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: InfinityandBeyond
Where is this unequal pay? Plenty of woman who work at my place of business make more than I do. I always read "woman should make money equally" but where are these places?


It's all over really. My wife makes less than the other "men" in her department. A lot less for equal work and equal experience.


There is no such thing as equal experience, just because two people have the same 10 years in a given industry doesn't mean that their experience and competence level is equivalent. Even holding the same job title in the same company doesn't mean you have equal experience.

I'm not saying it's OK to pay women less for doing the same job, but I am saying it's impossible to accurately compare two people's worth, and that the reason people make a certain amount is based on many complex factors.

Every job I've had I made more than some in my department, and less than others in my department, doing the exact same job. All were men, so gender bias wasn't an issue, so what accounts of the large variance in pay between men doing the same job? I guess we don't care about employees getting screwed over unless they are women, right?


I get your point, but in my wife's case she's actually more qualified and more experienced...it's fairly equal when you add in some of the other stuff that these guys know but there is actually no way in a fair workplace that she should be paid less. That's the issue It happens. We deal with it but we can't pretend it's right.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: f4rwest
All types of events are ruined by people using their platform making political statements.

Anyone swayed or feels empowered by what a little celebrity says is weak anyways.



Wait a second. Isn't that exactly what 90% of Fox News is though??? Little celebrities making political statements.

Remember, most of them aren't news anchors who deliver the news. They are pundits who give you their commentary and have become slightly famous for it. Bill O'Riley is the most well known of them all and he sways more conservative minds than anyone else.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
What is equal rights?

I mean, what would really happen if equal rights, equal pays would happen? Communism, and we all know commies are bad!!! I'm just joking around...

No but, let's stay in the subject of wages. I believe that people should be payed by calculations which would be something similar to :

Productivity X Education and Expertises X Value of Product Service X Talent/Rarity X Hours X Risk and Responsibilities



Sex shouldn't be part of the equation but sex also shouldn't be part of the reason for equal pay, men or women.
What is Just isn't always Equal.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Shhh, don't tell anyone on this thread that they will never achieve true social justice because it's impossible.


I understand the reasons of you thinking this way, but you are wrong and pessimist. It's like saying that it's impossible to go to another galaxy. Yes, we are far but it's not impossible.

With a well established system based on wages : Productivity X Education and Expertises X Value of Product Service X Talent/Rarity X Hours X Risk and Responsibilities, like I said in my previous post...eventually, we could reach what is Just...which isn't always what is Equal.


With free market capitalism, it surely is impossible but with some sort of advanced system including the best part of every "isms" aided by technology, I'm fairly certain we could attain near perfect social justice.
edit on 23-2-2015 by theMediator because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Onslaught2996



But really, what’s the point of being famous and having a soap box if you can’t use it? If Patricia Arquette can’t bring up the issue of wage equality when the world is watching her, when can she? And when can we? Well, that’s the whole point. Conservatives like the folks on Fox want us to STFU. They don’t want people talking about paying women — or anyone else — fairly for the work they do. Fox’s owners and sponsors want us to shut up and go away, and they’ll do their dangdest to make sure that no one can hear us scream.





Thanks to the Sony email hacks, we now know that the gender gap in pay exists as much in the entertainment industry as everywhere else. And, as Think Progress points out: Today, women still earn an average of 78 cents on the dollar — up just 17 cents since the Equal Pay Act. The picture is even worse for women of color. African-American women, for example, make just 64 cents for every dollar a white man makes.


Now tell me the right is for equality for all..




Now, don't get me lying!


Obviously, the last thing in the world they want is "equality for all." Much less, having to sit there and listen to a bunch of "liberal Hollywood elites" talking about it in front of big crowds.

How dare they!

edit on 23-2-2015 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: InfinityandBeyond
Where is this unequal pay? Plenty of woman who work at my place of business make more than I do. I always read "woman should make money equally" but where are these places?


It's rampant all over, in every city.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: f4rwest
All types of events are ruined by people using their platform making political statements.

Anyone swayed or feels empowered by what a little celebrity says is weak anyways.



Wait a second. Isn't that exactly what 90% of Fox News is though??? Little celebrities making political statements.

Remember, most of them aren't news anchors who deliver the news. They are pundits who give you their commentary and have become slightly famous for it. Bill O'Riley is the most well known of them all and he sways more conservative minds than anyone else.


Yes, but you know what you're going to get when you turn to Fox News or CNN or MSNBC. The Oscars is ostensibly a show about who made the best movies in that year, not about anything political. Basically it should be entertainment fluff and that's what people used to watch it for. Check out the ratings ... no one really paid it much mind.

You're trying to compare tuning in to sports radio and getting analysis of Michael Sams' bravery and the politics of a gay man in the NFL to tuning in to talk radio and getting Rush Limbaugh's commentary on it. There is no comparison. I expect to hear analysis of football and Michael Sams' ability to play the game on the one station and I would expect the political side of the issue from Limbaugh.

If I don't want one or the other, I avoid that station. It's simple or it should be, but now everything has politics everywhere so I can't avoid the politics of Michael Sam ... or women's pay ... no matter where I go or what I watch even if the program as advertised should have nothing to do with it.




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join