Are women really being persecuted if they are paid like men are?

Cambodian women carry heavy load on construction sites



from http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/cambodian-women-carry-heavy-load-construction-sites-160321115303764.html
7 Apr 2016 04:38:33 UTC

"Heavy Loads"?

Do they?

Do they really?

What's the bet they carry less than men do?

"Cambodia's construction boom has attracted a female workforce, who earn less than men "

Oh right, so they are paid less than men for the same work. So why bother hiring men? Do companies there not like profits? Have the employers decided that earning a living doesn't bother them anymore, that they'd rather go bankrupt?

It is financially irresponsible to hire a worker when they will make less profits for your company. Why on Earth would companies all turn out to be run by idiots? Do newspapers genuinely believe this is the case? Because they always seem to take that slant.

"This is a man's job but I can do it too," she proclaims as she takes off her gloves, revealing a hand with vanishing polish on the nails.

So it's not a man's job, it's just a job. Is she really being paid less for it? Construction workers I have seen tend to have to carry very heavy materials. Is she doing that, or the sort of thing an apprentice might do?

"About 30 percent to 35 percent of workers on construction sites are woman but it's still a problem for us to estimate this exactly as their work is not regular," Chhlonh told Al Jazeera.

Oh right - so they aren't working regular hours like the men do. A company isn't going to invest in you unless you are going to stick around.

Most of them, he says, migrate from rural areas to Phnom Penh to work with their husbands as daily "unskilled" labourers, with the aim of supporting themselves and their "parents or family in their hometown".

Again - they aren't working like the men who get more money, because those are skilled labourers.

So... is it that you expect skilled labourers to only be paid the same amount as unskilled? In which case - why bother working to get the skills? Isn't this the problem communist countries always face - everyone gets paid the same - so why work harder than the laziest worker - so the State then points a gun at everyone's head to force them to work, because the economic incentive has been removed?

This sounds like Feminism, which recycled Marxist beliefs about labour and capitalism - despite their utter failure on the world stage.

"She seems optimistic and unfazed by the lack of job security, and has a relaxed attitude towards safety on site."

You do not state that men have it better but you keep insinuating it. In Australia, men die at ten times the rate on the job due to workplace accidents. What's the bet those men working around these women are still the ones leaving in body-bags while the women do the safest jobs?

"What's going to happen to us when the construction is over?" asks a woman from Kampong Speu province, who was previously a farmer. "I am also worried if I have an accident what will happen to me. The company won't pay for my hospital bills."

And would it pay the bills for a man in that position? The journalist doesn't say. Why did they ignore that obvious question? Is it that they knew the answer and it wasn't going to be what they wanted?

In a lot of those countries, being a crippled man is a disaster. You can even be imprisoned for failing to be able to pay for your family - which has even happened in America.

"According to Adriana Siddle"

So your source is a Feminist? Jeez, I wonder what she's going to say?

A quick way to tell a feminist - they only care about violence against women,
even though most violence is towards men

"female construction workers face the same problems as all unskilled labourers"

SO THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WOMEN BEING OPPRESSED AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH LIFE BEING A BITCH FOR EVERYBODY.

"Women report a lack of access to benefits such as sick leave, paid holiday leave and maternity leave. "

SO DO MEN, AND YOU DO NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THEM.

Imagine someone saying about a mixed workforce:

"straight workers face terrible hazards in the mining industry"

To most people who weren't complete bigots, that would seem odd. Why straight workers in particular? Were bisexual workers somehow protected? Gay or lesbian?


Why do Feminists say they believe in equality, but do always focus on only one sex?

If you ask a Feminist why they emphasise the sex of victims, they will turn around and say "why are you always trying to talk about men!"

When you point out that men are victims as well, and Feminists claim to care equally about men and women, a Feminist will snap:

"of course we care equally but women's problems are far more sever so we will help men one day not today not tomorrow or the day after or the month or the year and not until the last woman has no problems at all...."

No, I kid. A feminist would never admit that - but that's what they mean.

If a gay and a straight person were hurt, you would take both of them to be treated. You wouldn't tell the gay person that they had to wait until all straight people everywhere were tended to unless you hated gay people.

Yet that is what Feminists do with men. They look at the deaths of male workers - and feel nothing. They hear some female workers might be injured one day - and they scream outrage. "One of us might be being treated like a man?!! This will not do!"

Chunta's story is one such case. Although she has been working on the site for two years, carrying and cutting steel bars, she continues to earn $6.25 per day - the same rate as her female colleague with two days on the job - while her husband earns $8 per day for work of a similar nature.

Feminists feel nothing when men die - we are just disposable labour. (source)

https://notehub.org/hpp2i#workplace

"That's because I have no skills... I am only carrying steel bars. My husband is the one putting them on the ceiling."

So the Feminist looks at two workers doing different jobs and concludes that an inequality in their pay must be sexism because ... they are paid differently for different work. He's up on the roof, she is on the ground. He's much more likely to die.

As a feminist, perhaps you can not care for men.
But don't you think the death of your father, your husband, your sons, might hurt just a little? (source)

"CARE's Siddle agrees that the type of tasks performed by men and women on-site can differ - some women report doing intricate work that is easier for those with smaller hands, like connecting wires. "

This sort of work is done by children, which includes the boys Feminists turn their noses up at as well. And as awful as that may be, it doesn't usually kill them.

(source)

The work the men do, on the other hand?

(source)

But as with a lot of work that is "gendered", she points out, "women have learned to undervalue their work".

Have they? That has a precise meaning. It means that an employer could pay them more and make more profits. So why aren't you setting up a company and getting rich, I wonder? Could it be that CAPITALISM DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

Employees aren't paid according to how much you feel they are worth, but according to the returns on the money invested in them by the employers. If one company gets the value wrong, another company will increase the wages offered and lure those workers over.

Feminists always claim women are worth more than they are paid - yet their never invest their own money in a capital venture on the basis of that faith. Deep down, they know it's wrong, but doublethink let them make any claim and believe it because it's convenient to believe it.

"many women work harder as they also work at home."

So an employer has to pay an employee more if they work at home?


EMPLOYERS DO NOT, CAN NOT,
PAY YOU BY WHAT YOU DO FOR YOURSELF.

THEY PAY YOU BY WHAT
YOU DO FOR THE COMPANY.

"And being a working mother, Chunta reluctantly admits, can be particularly strenuous."

Absolutely no investigation takes place here into how strenuous it is for the fathers here. Feminists simply assume they are carried about by clouds of privilege. The fact that men usually work longer hours at more physically demanding jobs never concerns them.

"The company didn't notice that it ws[sic] women's day," she says.

Any more than it notices international men's day. Companies are there to make profit for their investors, that's it.

What do you imagine companies should be doing? Why aren't you doing that instead of Feminist journalism?


Of course you won't do that. Feminist never get their hands dirty - instead, they manipulate and lie until others are forced to do all the work for them instead.


And if they cause a company to fail, a country to go bankrupt?

When companies fail, Feminists and Marxists imagine this benefits the workers
- the truth is it does them and their families and their communities harm,
and it can even break a nation.

Well, it's Patriarchy, who the fuck cares, there's always another host to latch onto and drain dry!

(source)