Feminism: Driving Down Wages Since 1965  

Posted by The Glo-ness in ,

As I sit here working out a business plan and balking at the sheer complexity of it, I really start to resent the Feminists. This is THEIR fault. Yep..I should be picking out curtains and baking bread, or at the very least, mildly answering phones in some nice, decently-paying secretarial job, but NO. Thanks to Feminism I have very few choices when it comes to getting that decently paying job, and am forced to practically do financial gymnastics just to make ends meet. Why is this, you may ask. Why not get that decently paying secretary job-they still exist! Um, no...for someone with no college degree. No...they don't. And this is why: thanks to the mass exodus of women entering the workforce, the wage pool has been polluted with legions of "hobby workers".

Since Feminism has sold women the lie of "a job is what you need!", we now have loads of married/or otherwise provided-for women working. And yes, I have a BIG problem with that, and here's why: if I go into an office and apply for your basic entry-level job (since I have no degree, that's pretty much all that's open to me) and I get the job, I will be offered about $10-12 an hour, if the boss is generous. This is not a livable wage. (Leo XIII would be turning in his grave) With today's inflation-ridden cost of living, $80 bucks a day (BEFORE taxes, mind you) ain't gonna cut it. But bosses get away with offering these joke wages because of simple economic supply and demand. Going back to the above example, if I try to negotiate for a higher wage, the boss has very little incentive to pay me more because there are plenty of (hobby-)"working women" who are more than willing to take the job for those wages. Why? Because in their mind they don't HAVE to be paid "a livable wage". In their mind, when they think of food and rent, it's "oh, well my husband'll pay for that." Women aren't really working for wages-but for the grown-up girl's version of "spending money". Which thus drives down wages for those of us who DON'T have a husband and who DO have to worry about how food and rent will be covered with that kind of pay.

Let's face it: most women today are working because they are bored and lack the ability to decide on their own how to spend their time productively. They are seeking a job because they are bored-and work is NOT for bored people. Work is for hungry people. When we have a whole segment of the working population working because they are looking for a diversion, then work itself becomes a twisted caricature of failed duties and dodged responsibilities. The health of the business (and by extension, the economy, as the business is the basic unit of the economy) is threatened because these workers are not really "working"-they are "playing" in a sense. They don't have the drive and commitment necessary to sustain the hardships required to do the job right. If these women are bored (whether they are living at home with parents or married) then I say to them: take up a hobby! Volunteer in a soup kitchen! That's what women USED to do when they were bored! They didn't go run into the workplace and drive down everyone's wages. Do everyone a favor: stay home and let those of us who are working because we have to put food on the table do our job and be paid fairly for it.

So as I finish my rant and go back to sitting here staring at my business plan, it hits me: I might have to actually HIRE these silly women... O_O Uh oh...cue the "Psycho music" (deet deeett!!)

This entry was posted on May 04, 2010 at Tuesday, May 04, 2010 and is filed under , . You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments feed .

20 comments

Awesome post Glo-ness! I totally agree with you - it's so annoying that people that don't really need jobs are taking the money from the ones that do. Ack.

May 4, 2010 at 8:57 PM

Very interesting...good post!

May 5, 2010 at 7:49 AM

good post..i hope i don't have that problem if i end up an unmarried

May 5, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Funny, I was just asking if Mgr Williamson was a feminist ...

May 9, 2010 at 2:12 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
May 10, 2010 at 4:38 PM

Hans-Georg,
Interesting post, and thanks for the link to my article. Your reference to Bishop Williamson's remarks reminded me of one thing I find perplexing about the Trad position on women and mothering: homeschooling. While working full-time outside the home is looked down on (and in my opinion, rightly so) people also advocate that the mother homeschool without batting an eyelash. I find this to be a strange contradiction: Homeschoooling is also a full-time job, but yet many people (in my experience I've mostly heard it from young Catholic men) will say, "oh yes, I want my/the wife to cook, clean, raise my kids, AND homeschool them". Don't get me wrong-I think it's necessary, if no good Trad school is around, but if outside employment is burdensome to a mother because she already has so many duties to do, so homeschooling is also another "extra" workload..now in addition to the already-existing work of laundry, meals and nursing, the Trad mom also has to plan lessons, spend time lecturing, and grade homework. Once again, the mother is having to take on an additonal "job"-that of an elementary school teacher. There's only so much a woman can do-I don't think people pay enough attention to this. Homeschooling seems to elicit this knee-jerk reaction of, "oh well, she can just shoehorn that into her schedule-no biggie!" But is it?? My point is not to put down homeschooling, it's just that if a woman is too busy to work outside the home, then she's probably too busy to homeschool. I know in today's society sacrifices have to be made, and I'm sure once the older siblings are old enough, they probably help out with the teaching, but still...the ease of which people expect a Trad mom to do homemaking, child-supervising AND homeschooling seems to show a lack of consideration of the magnitude of the work the average Trad mom is already doing.

Like I said-I'm not trying to put down homeschooling...I just don't like the "knee-jerk" reaction of "oh let's just throw that on the wife"...

May 10, 2010 at 4:40 PM

#1: "... I will be offered about $10-12 an hour..."

Untrue. Average wage for a worker with only a highschool education is around $30k/yr, which is a good 50% higher than that figure.

#2: "Let's face it: most women today are working because they are bored and lack the ability to decide on their own how to spend their time productively."

Quite an assumption you're making. Do you actually have any proof of this so called general phenomenon?

#3: I think there was a #3, but I forgot it. I add it in if I remember.

May 10, 2010 at 10:47 PM

Hans, I just read your post, and I do believe that you misunderstood Mgr Willianson. I fail to see the femenistic tendencies in expressing compassion for parents who have to raise a family in less than ideal circumstances. His Excellency's words were words of encouragement to those parents who do find themselves in such circumstances, reminding them that God never demands us to carry impossible crosses.

By the way, where was that quote taken from?

May 10, 2010 at 11:26 PM

@ Glo-ness:

Ah, homeschooling AND working outside home at one and same time was an even worse case scenario than the worst case scenarios His Highness mentioned. I did not think such a situation existed.

@ Devil's Advocate:

see answer above, plus fact that feminists seem to be pitying wives and mothers for doing what wives are usually doing

to your query, it was from his newsletter, earlier it would have been on his blog which now only functions as a way of ordering newsletter, and you will not get this one, but next.

May 11, 2010 at 4:02 AM

DA:

1) I actually DO have proof of the $10-12 an hour amount: I have contacted multiple (4 secretarial, 3 tech/IT) employment agencies (where they match you up with MULTIPLE employers-not ONE like in the newspaper or Craigslist), submitted my resume, described my education, skills and experience and over and over again $10-12 is what I am offered. So I go to the tech employment agencies, and there it's a little better: I can get $13 an hour with major corporations like Boeing. So from what I've been experiencing, the vast majority of employers are wanting $10-12 an hour. Where are you getting your statistic? That doesn't seem to be in touch with real-world conditions.

As for #2, yeah, I actually have some proof of that-I haven't done an actually scientific study or anything, but in my experience working, many of my co-workers were married and accepted the same lousy wages I got, and also, as a housecleaner, many of the women I work for have low-paying part-time jobs because they "are bored" and "don't know what to do at home all day". So don't assume that I am assuming-like I said, I haven't conducted any scientific studies, but I run into these women again and again in my life. I think that counts for something...

May 11, 2010 at 9:13 AM

Hans-Georg,
I suppose I wasn't clear in my comment-I wasn't saying Trad mothers are working as well as homeschooling (although, theoretically that IS possible, and my heart goes out to any such women) I was saying that a mother who homeschools her children is actually doing "two" jobs, just as a mother who has outside employment is also doing "two jobs". If the homeschooling mother also had some form of a part-time job, then she would in fact have THREE "jobs" (ie sets of obligations), that of "mother", "teacher" AND "worker/employee". All I am saying is that I think its hypocritical of those who say a married mother is too busy to work outside the home to then turn around and say "oh yeah, she can homeschool though, no problem...."

May 11, 2010 at 4:55 PM

I still don't see your point Hans. Mothers homeschooling and/or working outside the home is a less than ideal circumstance, in other words, a cross. How you manage to relate His Excellency's words to femenistic tendencies continues to confuse me. What exactly is femenistic about giving words of encouragement to those who have to bear these crosses?

May 12, 2010 at 12:53 AM

I know many women who are parents and the father can not make enough to make ends meet and the mother has to work to help provide the family with the essentials. I also know many women who work because they have no one else to care for them or heir needs. Still more many women are classmates entering professional careers such as nursing, PT, and OT. I would have to say that the demographic of women who are married and bored with themselves and so they get a job is a much smaller stat than you might expect. That said, these same bored/married women would normally be expected to take lesser paying jobs or ones that require less technical training. They are after all bored, not motivated.

As for the $10-$12 argument.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77

Those stats are official government stats from 2006 and earlier. Honestly though there are a lot of entry level jobs that could afford a certain level of upward movement from within after only a few years. Other jobs don't even require a HS diploma/GED and make upwards of $15-$20/hour. It's all about what you are willing to do and where you live. And don't give me the whole "guys earn more" line. That may be true in certain fields, but it is the other way for other fields believe me.

Lastly, I agree with DA on this one. I was not able to read the whole article yet, but the excerpt HGL posted did not in any way seem feminist. The good Bishop does make some presumptions that are not always true though. "father is liable to be run ragged by commuting, by unsatisfying work...". While I can not speak for everyone I am entering a field of work I enjoy and love. It's not going to be perfect, but as long as I thank God for the good and the bad I will be happy. He goes on to say that women will be exhausted from having many children. This is in reference to the raising of the children and not the actual child labor which is exhausting in it's own right though not a constant state of being. He also assumes that women are the only ones to home school the kids. Again I speak only for myself, but I hope to be able to not only teach the children of other families, but my own as well. I don't see why I can not help them learn when I return from work. He says that the woman would look for work outside the home to help pay for the education of the children if the only other schools available were too corrupt AND IF SHE AND HER HUSBAND CAN NOT EFFECTIVELY HOME SCHOOL the children. This also assumes that the job that the man has can not afford to pay for the education of the children in the private institution. The "peoples scorn" he mentions refers to the people of the world and not Tradcats. In the end he says that God does not expect the impossible from us. I personally can not see how any woman would want to work outside the home AND home school besides her usual everyday tasks. The purpose of her working would be to help pay for the schooling of the children in a private institution.

Now it is 2:30am and I will go to bed before I start to repeat myself on here.

May 12, 2010 at 1:39 AM

@Glo-ness:

Mother and teacher of little children (and bigger daughgters) are not two works, they are part and parcel of same thing.

Teacher of bigger boys would rather be the work of the father, except in such cultures where learning includes such a lot that it is left to specialists (that includes our own).

OK, yes, learning what has to be learnt in order to teach second degree equations or Roman Classics is an extra job. Only, the occasions would be rare, normally. If one is from a family where one already has one or other of those lores, or even both, one would not learn that while homeschooling, but already have learned that.

And if one is not from such a family, normally one's children would not be obliged to know it either.

@Devil's Advocate: the feminist thing was not the words of encouragement, but assuming the worst. Which feminists also do, though in the different goal of discouraging "women's traps" like big families.

@ Both: if one already has given birth before (sufficiently long before), the work of mothering can be shared with the older siblings of the new one (I guess the Erausquin girls know that more in practise than I) and becomes therefore less exhausting.

May 12, 2010 at 5:02 AM

Jude Emblem,
I believe you misunderstood my post-I'm not saying women shouldn't work, I'm saying women who aren't in financial necessity shouldn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of Trad mothers are in financial necessity and I was not directing my post at them.

As for the $10-12 an hour statistic were you adding that link for or against my statement? Because I did the math and according to your chart, $24,000 a year works out to $11.50 an hour (24000 divided by 2080 working hours a year) Even if we are using the $30,000 a year figure, that still only comes out to $14 an hour-a mere two dollars above my estimate (not %50 as DA said). And all this is even before taxes...

Hans-Georg,
"Mother and teacher of little children (and bigger daughgters) are not two works, they are part and parcel of same thing"

No they are not-there's a distinction here depending on what definition of "teaching" you are using. Yes, Motherhood includes teaching in the sense of teaching a child things like how to brush his teeth, don't stand on the table or pull your sister's hair, when you talk to people say "Please" and "thank you", etc, etc...Yes, technically that is teaching. But homeschooling is a much more formal method of teaching and as such it requires more time and concentration to be done right. Now in addition to giving semi-quick instructions here and there, one has to sit down with the child, get him or her to concentrate, have them open a book, listen to you while you explain to them the lesson, check their understanding by asking them questions, re-stating the part of the lesson they didn't understand, give them their assignment, help them complete it, etc, etc...So yes, objectively speaking, this is an additional time burden.

Everyone:
Basically, the spirit in which my post and comments are being written in, is that I think Bishop Williamson is dead-on: as far as ideal conditions for parenthood and family, we are WAAAY off as a society. I really think in 150 years or so, we're going to have a whole slew of canonized parents from our current generation. Our society's conditions are penalizing parents of large families so heavily, from what I can see, it looks like it's gonna take heroic virtue just to get the job done.

May 12, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Glo: My link was neither in favor nor against your comment. I was merely posting an official source we could agree on. I do know that waitresses and bar tenders make quite a bit more per hour than $10-$12. It all depends on what work you are willing to do.
You're dead on about formal schooling and raising children being two separate jobs. I still don't know where a lot of Trads get off saying that raising the kids and teaching them etc. is the sole responsibility of the mother. As if men aren't supposed to help do anything when they return from work. One more thing. The kids can't really help educate their siblings until later on in their teenage years. That leaves 15 years of children to educate solo. Good luck with that.

May 12, 2010 at 11:03 AM

My ma homeschooled me while studying at University (full time). Her old school books, my reading skill and reading will, I could ask her anything any time I liked, but as long as I was studying something, she was alright with me skipping the school where I was unhappy.

May 12, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Feminists assume the worst.
H.E. assumes the worst.
Ergo: H.E. is a feminist?

Non sequitur.

May 12, 2010 at 12:30 PM

Unless they assume same worst and it is unrealistic.

Of course I took feminist in the wider sense as catering to feminism, just as a man who says a thirteen year old girl is quasi per definition a child is objectively catering to abortionists even if otherwise pro-life.

May 12, 2010 at 1:41 PM

@Jude: "I know many women who are parents and the father can not make enough to make ends meet and the mother has to work to help provide the family with the essentials. I also know many women who work because they have no one else to care for them or heir needs. Still more many women are classmates entering professional careers such as nursing, PT, and OT. I would have to say that the demographic of women who are married and bored with themselves and so they get a job is a much smaller stat than you might expect."

It should be noted that most people are single today as a direct result of feminism, whether it be single mothers and fathers (divorce), single women (who don't want to get married), single men (can't find marriageable women), bored wives (most 2-income families). All of these demographics drive down wages for the earner in the 1-income family.

November 9, 2011 at 6:14 PM

Post a Comment