 |
| Bryan Derksen. "Profiles/vase". 3-2-07 via Wikipedia. CC BY-SA 3.0. |
What are the key perspectives or schools of thought?
There are different levels of understanding and advocating against the gender gap. Many people only understand it in terms of 'women have it worse than men', and although this is accurate, this really downplays the magnitude of the gap and the way it hurts those affected. One of the most popular statistics to throw around is that on average women make $.77 for every dollar a man earns in the same position. This is a double edged statistic because it represents cisgender heterosexual white women, and although it may raise awareness about the gap, it doesn't accurately depict the struggles of people of color and people who identity under the LGBTQ umbrella. Although their are varying levels of understanding about the gap, there are also perspectives or groups of people that simply disregard it and don't think it's even a real thing. Finally, there are also a number of people that support the gap and still believe that women are actually less qualified than men to do these jobs.
What are the major points of contention or major disagreements among these perspectives?
The major points of contention between these perspectives are twofold. The first is between the different advocates for women, and it brings into question how much they understand the gap and the different ways it intersects with other identities. The major point of contention between all three larger groups (opposers of the gap, neutral, and supporters) is whether or not that gender gap is really something that we should be spending time and energy trying to resolve.
What are the possible points of agreement, or the possible common ground between these perspectives?
The possible points of agreement between the perspectives are that the gap is definitely a real thing, and that everybody wants the best outcome possible. If we could all step back and realize that we all want what's best for our society and that really we just have different ideas about what that is, then the groups could hopefully work together to find a solution.
What are the ideological differences, if any, between these perspectives?
Some of the people that believe women are actually less qualified believe that because that's how they were raised. Generations ago, that was the way the world worked and so now the older men that have put themselves in positions of power are still holding on to that antiquated world view. Because this is more of a generational divide in ideology rather than two different ideologies being present at the same time, it's much harder to try and change their mind about the issue.
What specific actions do these perspectives or texts ask their audiences to take?
The advocates for gender equality ask their audiences to take a number of steps to promote equality and try to reduce the gap. A few of these steps include supporting women at rallies, giving them equal opportunities for advancement in the workplace, raising pay rates for women, and I've even read some articles that asked men to take pay cuts so that everybody would be making the same amount. The neutral party doesn't ask their audience to do anything because they seen no need. Then the more conservative, gap supporting party asks their audience to stay strong and fight the feminists.
What perspectives are useful in supporting your own arguments about the issue? Why did you choose these?
The gender equality perspective is very useful in supporting my own arguments about the gap because that's essentially the side that I'm on. I chose these arguments because it's what I believe in, and I don't see the point in writing if I'm not writing about something that I care about. With that said, I also chose to focus on intersectionality because it's something that many people are unaware of but it has a huge impact on the way you view social justice issues and the impact things have on individuals.
What perspectives do you think will be the greatest threat to your argument? Why so?
There are different levels of understanding and advocating against the gender gap. Many people only understand it in terms of 'women have it worse than men', and although this is accurate, this really downplays the magnitude of the gap and the way it hurts those affected. One of the most popular statistics to throw around is that on average women make $.77 for every dollar a man earns in the same position. This is a double edged statistic because it represents cisgender heterosexual white women, and although it may raise awareness about the gap, it doesn't accurately depict the struggles of people of color and people who identity under the LGBTQ umbrella. Although their are varying levels of understanding about the gap, there are also perspectives or groups of people that simply disregard it and don't think it's even a real thing. Finally, there are also a number of people that support the gap and still believe that women are actually less qualified than men to do these jobs.
What are the major points of contention or major disagreements among these perspectives?
The major points of contention between these perspectives are twofold. The first is between the different advocates for women, and it brings into question how much they understand the gap and the different ways it intersects with other identities. The major point of contention between all three larger groups (opposers of the gap, neutral, and supporters) is whether or not that gender gap is really something that we should be spending time and energy trying to resolve.
What are the possible points of agreement, or the possible common ground between these perspectives?
The possible points of agreement between the perspectives are that the gap is definitely a real thing, and that everybody wants the best outcome possible. If we could all step back and realize that we all want what's best for our society and that really we just have different ideas about what that is, then the groups could hopefully work together to find a solution.
What are the ideological differences, if any, between these perspectives?
Some of the people that believe women are actually less qualified believe that because that's how they were raised. Generations ago, that was the way the world worked and so now the older men that have put themselves in positions of power are still holding on to that antiquated world view. Because this is more of a generational divide in ideology rather than two different ideologies being present at the same time, it's much harder to try and change their mind about the issue.
What specific actions do these perspectives or texts ask their audiences to take?
The advocates for gender equality ask their audiences to take a number of steps to promote equality and try to reduce the gap. A few of these steps include supporting women at rallies, giving them equal opportunities for advancement in the workplace, raising pay rates for women, and I've even read some articles that asked men to take pay cuts so that everybody would be making the same amount. The neutral party doesn't ask their audience to do anything because they seen no need. Then the more conservative, gap supporting party asks their audience to stay strong and fight the feminists.
What perspectives are useful in supporting your own arguments about the issue? Why did you choose these?
The gender equality perspective is very useful in supporting my own arguments about the gap because that's essentially the side that I'm on. I chose these arguments because it's what I believe in, and I don't see the point in writing if I'm not writing about something that I care about. With that said, I also chose to focus on intersectionality because it's something that many people are unaware of but it has a huge impact on the way you view social justice issues and the impact things have on individuals.
What perspectives do you think will be the greatest threat to your argument? Why so?
I think the neutral perspective will be the biggest threat because they're effectively the swing vote. I wan't them to get off of the fence and decide which side of history they're on, but that also carries the risk of them 'voting' against me and supporting the gap. Although this would be unfortunate, I'd still rather everybody be educated and have more people against me than have to deal with ignorant people that don't have anything to say about something this important.
#/media/File:Cup_or_faces_paradox.svg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment