Heroines Kickstarter

[Gold Bearer]

So what if there were 50% men and 50% women (just to keep it simple) on the workforce and 60% of the work was being done by men and 40% by the women, should the women's wages be 80% of the men's? NO! What if the top performer was one of the women? That would be extremely unfair. Gender should play no part in wages. You either pay them all the same or based on individual performance.

[knightkrawler]

That was the first answer I .... ugh, yeah I'm going to go back to not caring, apparently I don't qualify as a feminist anyway.

I don't know, are you a feminist? You didn't give an outright answer but asked my question in other words.
I was serious on how I wanted to know the feminist view on that topic. You basically posted my underlying thoughts in the form of questions which doesn't help when I ask the feminists out there for an outright answer from the POV of feminism. I don't know the first thing about feminism, so I wanna have it explained to me when I'm posing a question and there's someone here very passionate about the topic who "won't go away" either, anyway.
I didn't wanna give you the impression that your post was overlooked.

So what if there were 50% men and 50% women (just to keep it simple) on the workforce and 60% of the work was being done by men and 40% by the women, should the women's wages be 80% of the men's? NO! What if the top performer was one of the women? That would be extremely unfair. Gender should play no part in wages. You either pay them all the same or based on individual performance.

In an ideal society, everybody does what they do best, and that's that. There's not even the need for payment in there.
No need for equality, for that matter, because of that first and foremost prerequisite.

[Once was Mortimer]

Well I felt Goblin King was right and we should really get back onto the proper topic, or at least start a new thread if we are going to continue this. Other than that your obtuseness rather irked hence that last reply. Any, I feel you misread my post, yes it framed the answer as questions, but I don't think that answered it any less.

[Gold Bearer]

In an ideal society, everybody does what they do best, and that's that. There's not even the need for payment in there.
No need for equality, for that matter, because of that first and foremost prerequisite.

Oh wouldn't that be lovely. No more motivation based purely on personal gain and making money but instead based on what needs to be done. That would increase everyone's personal wealth anyway. If we stopped wasting time and energy on competition and focused on cooperation the world would be better practically overnight. Imagine where we'd be now if it worked like that from the start.

[knightkrawler]

OK, back on topic.
These miniatures - to me as a player and as a painter both - are unattractive.
Not the women. The miniatures.

As I said in the other thread dealing with the same overall topic this thread succumbed to...
I'd rather want some ugly, fat, unattractive, mongrel female miniatures than these here with their beautiful faces clad in layers of green and brown and rucksack.
There's the real hypocrisy of this Kickstarter to me: the faces are still the same old cute and pretty cliché (I find that rather incongruous with feminism, by the way). The bodies showing through the wools and leathers are still slim and impeccable. There are fat and ugly women out there, I've seen them. Some must be adventurers.

[cynthialee]

A true unpacking of this topic would take a dissertation or a Thesis.

We need to culturally examine out concepts of productivity and individual worth being somehow intrinsically tied together.
Most work is a group thing. Even if one person can do allot more work than others in the crew, the project will fail without the extra hands involved. So if the project will fail without a few less productive employees then those people are indispensable and vital. If they are vital, why should they be paid less than the high producer? Just because the person produce more work than their peers is no excuse to marginalize the other workers who are incapable of meeting this employees level of production.
Take the Quarter Back on the team... he should not get paid more than other players. Let us see this fool make a play without an offensive line or running back to back his ass...

I posit that the argument that a person who is blessed to be able to maximize productivity should be rewarded higher than others is a form of hierarchy building and I don't think hierarchy is a good thing. Basically that argument is that because someone is genetically blessed they should be constantly rewarded by society for that bonus. The fact that you can produce more and get that feeling of physical superiority should be your reward. We shouldn't be in the market of giving that person extra money.

Perhaps individual productivity and value should be a measurement of personal production against personal potential? If you are working at 90% productivity for your personal maximum potential then rewards should be reflected in the compensation. And a person only working at 40% of potential should be compensated less than the 90% person? That makes sense.

Perhaps we should have a more Star Fleet like society. Do your job and you have no wants or needs.
Why should we have a money system that favors the wealthy? Why not a more egalitarian society where individual value is not measured against some metric of performance or monetary value?
Certainly can't be worse than the current systems of society we have in place.
I believe in equity over equality.

[Anderas]

Definitely not.

I was studying five years to have a good salary.
If somebody told me "You can do what you want but you won't earn more" then I would have taken an easy-going job that i could forget in the evenings.

Furniture craftsman or five star cook or bridge watchman (you know the guy who presses the button to open the bridge if a ship comes).... something like that.
Instead i am electrical engineer (which is my passion, too) but i don't anymore do a crap in my field since a couple of years...

Don't you forget to remind me when that other Kickstarter is going online. 8th February.

[slev]

To address KK's point, I'm first going to use an example.

In the UK, the HSE sets health & safety guidelines. The "maximum unassisted lift", i.e. how much a person can reasonably be expected to carry, on their own, without any kind of machine, is set at 25kg for men and 20kg for women, to account for physiological differences.

So, let's say your job is physically taxing in a certain way. Let us also assume that physiological differences make this a job that women are less likley to be able to do than men. That would be a fair enough statement. Saying that women (in the abstract) can't do the job, but men (in the abstract) can, would not be a fair statement though.

So, if you're not being sexist, the job is defined by the operational requirements, and if few women can actually DO the job and a few men can't, fine. That doesn't mean that no women can. And if they can, they deserve the same pay as a man doing the same job at the same level.

However, it is also the fact that society implies "gender roles", that we feminists aim to do-away with, that say that women shouldn't be doing this kind of work, as they're too weak. At the same time though, those same gender roles tell men that they should be doing this kind of work, because they shouldn't be week like women, shame on you if you can't do it.

[slev]

Also , a quick rule of thumb:

If you can word your argument without identity factions (age, race, sex, gender, sexuality, etc), and it still make sense, it's *probably* fine.

If you do that and it doesn't make sense, it's *probably* bigoted and you should think very carefully about it.

[knightkrawler]

However, it is also the fact that society implies "gender roles", that we feminists aim to do-away with, that say that women shouldn't be doing this kind of work, as they're too weak. At the same time though, those same gender roles tell men that they should be doing this kind of work, because they shouldn't be week like women, shame on you if you can't do it.

Extrapolating from this I'm more of a feminist than I thought I'd be.