Post: #1

Quote:One of Australia's largest medical research institutes has introduced a scheme aimed at boosting its number of female scientists.

QIMR Berghofer, based in Brisbane, is offering female scientists with at least one child below high-school age an annual lump sum payment of $10,000.

The institute has also reserved a number of places at a nearby childcare centre for its staff, established a breastfeeding room, and dedicated carparks for women in their final term of pregnancy.

QIMR Berghofer director and CEO Professor Frank Gannon said the challenges facing women in the world of science were particularly intense.

He said the new initiative would hopefully help women rise to the top of their field and stay there.

"I think that we have to have women in the workforce to the same degree as there are men and there is real statistical evidence that shows that this is not happening at the right level worldwide," he said.

"Not just talking about it but doing things means that when somebody is wondering about what should they do next in terms of family, at least there's some support there and more than that there's a culture of support."

Women account for 36 per cent of scientific leadership roles at QIMR Berghofer.

Two of the institute's nine senior scientists are female.

QIMR Berghofer hopes the new scheme will lead to an increase in those figures.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-17/fe...ob/8061410

Where the fuck can I start with this lunacy? Bear in mind that in Australia the maternity leave on offer, government-funded, is six months of your salary if your salary is up to $75,000 per year. Something like that.

This salary data I found on a third-party website gives an indication of how these jobs at QIMR Berghofer are hardly the sort you will read about in Charles Dickens novels:

Quote:How much does QIMR Berghofer in Australia pay?
The average QIMR Berghofer salary ranges from approximately $66,573 [US$48,618.26] per year for Interim Health and Safety Advisor to $111,762 [US$81,619.79] per year for Regulatory Affairs Manager.

https://au.indeed.com/cmp/Qimr-Berghofer/salaries

A number of positions at this place would be higher - the figures I cite are only based on recent advertisements, so not all positions are covered.

If you can't raise kids with that amount of money (one person's salary in what are usually two-parent homes or one-parent homes plus child support), you shouldn't have fucking kids.

Women already get the majority of public health expenditure, even when childbirth and related care is excluded. We've had ROK authors report on how many more women do crap all for the tax base, too.

Madness.

Post: #2

This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

So what do you guys really want?

Post: #3

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

So what do you guys really want?

I'm still waiting for the explanation...

Post: #4

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

Post: #5

There is no world where you can bang 50 different girls every year and expect most of the female population to be traditional and prude. If you fucked 50 women, then chances are each of those girls fucked at least 100 guys that year.
There is no world where you want women to submit to you and look at you as a leader but on a date expect her to split the money with you.

Post: #6

I fully support government funded long maternity leave. Make it start at three months pregnant.

Have you ever had to work with a pregnant woman? They are awful. They cry all the time, need all kinds of days off, piss every twenty minutes and generally destroy productivity.

Just get them the hell out of there and eliminate Nate the hit your business is going to take keeping them around.

Aloha!

Post: #7

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

So what do you guys really want?

Men and women aren't equal, but woman can and should still work. Therefore they can pay for themselves.

There are other ways to solve declining fertility rates.

Can't really talk about Islam as it's pretty fucking based (how many other religions let you have a harem?)

I'm not against sluts. I love em - I just wouldn't wifey one.

Post: #8

Giving women extra 10k for having kids granted the baby is not out of born out of wedlock is a great thing. As that 10k will go to that family. Having a family should be encouraged. A great move by that company

Post: #9

Men should be given bonuses for fathering children with their wives. Subsidizing women (who may get pregnant from bad boys) isn't a good idea. First off, men will have to work extra hours for free to pay for this scheme.

I'm all for women having children, but they should be dependant on a good man to take care of them, not offloading the cost to their male co-workers. This is also bad for the company, as they will have even less of the workforce engaged. Expect many female employees to quit after taking the bonuses.

Post: #10

I've got mixed feelings. Their motivations are terrrible, but the actual result will be more Western births and more women quitting to raise kids at home.

Post: #11

(12-17-2016 04:17 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  I've got mixed feelings. Their motivations are terrrible, but the actual result will be more Western births and more women quitting to raise kids at home.

Post: #12

Stop speaking of this forum as if it is a place with one unified ideological position. Yes, there are definitely ideological trends here (support for Trump, for example) but they are not absolute. There is a diversity of people and opinions here.

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

I personally am annoyed at how women try to have their cake and eat it, too. They want to be independent, equal participants in society...except when it comes to date time.

I simply want them to choose a way and be consistent. I suspect many men here would agree with me, though not all, and those that do or don't can speak for themselves.

Quote:You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You're talking about the article?

Most likely that one company offering welfare for female scientists won't help the birthrate. But there is a case to be made that by offering to women AND men it could help--after all, don't fathers pay for children, too?

That's where identity politics fails. You're usually better off looking at things as a whole instead of just looking at one slice (demographic).

Quote:You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

I don't think women shouldn't be able to vote. All US citizens should be able to vote, full stop.

Don't have an opinion on Islam.

Quote:Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.

Men are going to do what's available--if women don't want to be traditional and get married, if they wanna ride the cock carousel until 30, then we're going to take that and keep it moving. When they want to act like ladies and be chaste and traditional and polite and nice, then I'll treat them appropriately. And there's nothing contradictory about having fun with sluts but not wanting to wife up a ho--when you're young and single you may live in an apt in the city, but when you're married with children you may want a house in a quiet area. Same concept.

Post: #13

I don't see the problem here, any workplace that encourages women having kids should be applauded.

Post: #14

(12-17-2016 04:33 PM)Vicious Wrote:  I don't see the problem here, any workplace that encourages women having kids should be applauded.

Women having children isn't the entire problem. Unmarried women having them is the problem.

Increasing birth rates is a noble goal. Increasing birth rates of women that shouldn't be having kids in the first place is not.

Post: #15

A few of you guys are *spectacularly* missing the point.

The reason behind this $10,000 payment for women is that they face "discrimination" in science. It's pure bullshit and a validation of hysteria.

It's the same kind of reasoning typically employed when feminists invent a "discrimination crisis" in business ("we need gender quotas!") or a "rape crisis" on campus ("let academics determine if rape occurred!").

Plus, the women interviewed ALREADY had kids. And there's no evidence it will increase the birth rate.

Yes, we want a higher fertility rate. But amongst women who expect to be paid more than men for their job when they already get their salary paid for six months via the government and/or employer as maternity leave? Are you kidding me? Fuck off. We don't want that. It's pussy pedestalization at its worst.

If you support feminists or feminized workplaces determining the basis on which women get paid more than men for the same job, I don't think RVF is for you.

Post: #16

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

I don't see any of these as particularly contradicting at all, particularly the forum's dislike of Islam, given its tendency to rape, invade, and blow off limbs using pressure cooker bombs. And of course, the "you say you want traditional woman but you bang sluts" thing has been covered several million times before. I believe Roosh himself has written about this subject, though I couldn't swear to it and am perhaps confusing him with Roissy.

Post: #17

Pregnant women who get paid maternity leave are already living the life.

Get paid money to sit at home after taking a position a more productive person could do and be there in the office doing the work? What a fucking racket!

The company loses out because they're paying a person who isn't working, unless they are working from home. Then they need to hire someone else to do their job. Brilliant economics!

They simply should not be taking jobs full stop but because the economy and price of living is such a shit show you have to get double incomes. I'm all for motherhood but all of these band aids are not going to reverse a trend of too few children being born to western parents when compared to immigrant parents.

If the economy tanks all of these women relying on these benefits will be destroyed.

Post: #18

(12-17-2016 04:17 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  I've got mixed feelings. Their motivations are terrrible, but the actual result will be more Western births and more women quitting to raise kids at home.

Did you actually read the article? They're paying female scientists $10,000 more than men per year TO WORK if they have kids.

So, you have a male scientist who earns $80,000. The female scientist with kids will get paid $90,000 per year for the same job until a kid is five years old.

It will NOT get her to raise the kid at home.

Post: #19

(12-17-2016 04:00 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.
...
There is no world where you can bang 50 different girls every year and expect most of the female population to be traditional and prude. If you fucked 50 women, then chances are each of those girls fucked at least 100 guys that year.
There is no world where you want women to submit to you and look at you as a leader but on a date expect her to split the money with you.

Fucking 50 different girls per year is a reaction to women not being traditional and prude, not its cause. We didn't cause this, we just adapted to the situation.

Get off your high horse and stop being flabbergasted about "contradictions" that are really not.

Post: #20

(12-17-2016 04:57 PM)AlphaRN Wrote:  

(12-17-2016 04:33 PM)Vicious Wrote:  I don't see the problem here, any workplace that encourages women having kids should be applauded.

Women having children isn't the entire problem. Unmarried women having them is the problem.

Increasing birth rates is a noble goal. Increasing birth rates of women that shouldn't be having kids in the first place is not.

The vast majority of kids born in the western world are by couples in some form of stable relationships. Why focus on a small minority just because they might reap the same benefits?

Post: #21

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

So what do you guys really want?

So, just to clarify, you are in favour of women prioritizing their career over raising their children?

Post: #22

(12-17-2016 06:47 PM)Vicious Wrote:  The vast majority of kids born in the western world are by couples in some form of stable relationships.

1. 23.6% of US children (17.4 million) lived in father absent homes in 2014.

[US Census Bureau, 2015] Living arrangements of children under 18 years and marital status of parents, by age, sex, race, and hispanic origin and selected characteristics of the child for all children: 2014. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.

(with a note that the remaining number of 76.4% includes part-time and visiting fathers, foster parents, remarriages, gay parents and other family units that are just as destructive on average, just as you would expect from the vast starting share of births out of wedlock)

Over half? Yes. Vast majority? No way.

Post: #23

Western world, not US.

Post: #24

The rates in many countries of the Western world are even worse than in the USA - see the link in my post for an example.

Post: #25

(12-17-2016 03:49 PM)LikeABaller Wrote:  This forum is very interesting. People are very confused here, let me explain why.

You guys say feminism is cancer, and women and men arent equal.
But then everyone here gets pissed when the women doesn't pay for their share of the date.

You guys are worried about the declining fertility rates
When the employers offer affirmative action to increase it then you're against it

You say women are irrational and shouldn't be able to vote.

Islam doesn't give women the right to vote or even be a witness because they are irrational, yet Islam is the most despised religion in this forum.

Most people including I are against sluts and like traditional women.

But then people start opening topics on how many women they wanna bang. If you're gonna bang that amount of women obviously theres gonna be a lot of sluts.


Very conflicting opinions...

So what do you guys really want?

Different people want different things at different parts of their lives.