Male or Female Is the True Question

We live a society today to promote the equality of women and the progressive changes to the old gender roles that have carried on through the generations. We now promote the individuality of woman as being their own income supply, no longer having to fulfill the old housewife ideal, and able to fit into the same social roles that men can. While Men on the other hand are supposed to keep their old social roles as the bread earner, the maintenance man, and the bill payer. But doesn’t this create a certain type of paradox in that we promote change but only if you are part of one gender. Many believe that the male gender right now is have delightful experience in this society but they often overlook the little things that are hidden in those old social roles that men are supposed to keep. While there is a wage gap between the two genders people often overlook you often pays most the financial expenses. While this may not be the case for everyone Men often get stuck with the bill at the end of the day. But what happened to this equality that we are try to gain. How can one be equal if they are expected to pay for everything will the other is not supposed to and if that one person wants to split the bill with the person this is often viewed as a big turn off and even the deal breaker between couples. Why is that?

Women often are raised to believe that the man on a date should always pick up the check if he is a true gentleman. And this traces back to the old school role of men paying for the bills in the relationship. But what if the man doesn’t have a large income of his own. Is it his fault he can’t afford to pay for the both of your meals all the time and pay for his own expenses?  Why can one of the opposite gender step in and say ill pay for this dinner because you paid for the last one and I know money is really tight right now. Or even say let me pay my half of the bill a least, I want to contribute to the bill too. One doesn’t have to cover the whole bill but a least contribute a little bit to it. You may not make as much as your partner but try to contribute what you can in proportion to what you make. Most guys will pay for the check because they were raised right as a kid by their parents but hearing a women say hey I want to help out actually means a lot to the man. This applies in many instances, for instance when me and my girlfriend go out on a date I always say I will cover the bill and but she always asks to help contribute to paying because she was raised right too. She treats me like she would a friend. You don’t go out to dinner with a friend all the time and never pay for your part of the meal or at least offer to pay. A man just wants to be appreciated for what he does. According to askmen.com “if she’s a quality girl, you can expect she’ll grab the check when it arrives — and let her. This move on her part sends two important messages: a sign of respect to you and a statement of equality for her. So, allow her to pay when she initiates the date. Conversely, during these early stages, keep in mind that if she never makes the gesture to reciprocate — especially on those dates she initiated — chances are she never will.” (https://sites.psu.edu/uscrimercl/wp-admin/edit.php)

And it’s it because oh magazines like vogue you tell a women how to fake a man into think you actually want to contribute to the bill or even pay it. According to Vogue that talk about “The Reach” where “More than half of the staff agreed, you should always reach inside your bag once the check arrives—even if you don’t intend to pay. “You do the fiddling, the shuffling, and give them enough time to reach for their own wallets to take care of the bill,” says one editor, “or else what’s the option? Just sitting there and staring at them, waiting? No, that’s too awkward.” But a few others believe that during a first date, the reach—even a fake one—is out of the question. “I never even pretend to reach if it’s a first date. That’s just standard,” says another editor, “unless, it’s a confusing situation where I don’t know if we’re on a date or we’re just friends. Then, I’ll do the pretend reach.” (http://www.vogue.com/article/modern-etiquette-paying-for-dinner-on-a-date)

In the end the man should pick up the bill every time if he was taught right but that doesn’t mean one should not be willing to help him out. And a women was not taught right if she didn’t at least offer to pay her part. But in this society should that change if people want equality? If people want equality between the genders then they should specify what specifically they want equality in. Because right now it doesn’t seem to be equal.

The economy is what holds a country together and what holds the people together. It plays one of the most intrinsically on people’s everyday lives, providing them the money for the purchasing of goods they want and the means of buying the necessities to live. It has always been around in some shape or form but the aspects of it have been changing as the times went on. Some changes were very progressive for the time will somethings that you would expect to see changed have not moved in quite some time and our quite antique in their views. One of those things that haven’t moved in quite some time the wage gap between the genders. With men historically earning their fully possible wage while women over the years have progressively earned a high and higher wage but at a point that stopped and this grew this gap between men and women with women earning 22% less than the average men’s salary.

Women have had a place in the workforce since ancient times working in the fields and helping the men out with menially tasks to keep the family going. This stayed this way for quite some time and often their role would increase but they would always be behind men when it came to any compensation or acknowledgement. For a while when women were slowly starting to earn wages that had progressively turned into what we have now which is a salary. Women had to fight for every job opportunity because there wasn’t much for them like there was for men with 15% of the work force being women before World War I. It wasn’t until World War I that women took over the jobs that men had left behind when they went off to work but they were never labeled the money makers or workers. They were expected to forfeit their jobs back up to men when they came home from the war. World War II is when millions of jobs were created for women outside of the home. And from then on women joined the workforce as a necessity to prove their independence and instead of just being viewed as part of a marriage. Up until more recent time’s women earned monumentally less than men but as of now it is only 22% less which compared to back then is not a lot but in this period of time it is considered a large difference in pay.

There are many reason that such a wage gap could exist and they ranged from biology of the genders to the beliefs of the people hiring and paying them. In regards to women, “Women face different workplace health challenges than men. This is partly because men and women tend to have different kinds of jobs. Women generally have more work-related cases of carpal tunnel syndrome, tendonitis, respiratory diseases, infectious and parasitic diseases, and anxiety and stress disorders. Social, economic, and cultural factors also put women at risk for injury and illness. For example, women are more likely than men to do contingent work part-time, temporary, or contract work. Compared to workers in traditional job arrangements, contingent workers have lower incomes and fewer benefits. Like all workers in insecure jobs, women may fear that bringing up a safety issue could result in job loss or more difficult work situations. They may also be less likely to report a work-related injury.”(https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/women/#2). Along with when a women becomes pregnant she is entitled to maternity leave which is not something that a man is entitled to so this could be a reason for the difference in pay. According to https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/04/14/five-facts-about-gender-pay-gap  “One reason the gender wage gap has narrowed faster among younger women is that between 1980 and 2013, the median age of first birth rose from 22.6 to 26.0. Because motherhood is associated with a wage penalty and lower wage gains later in a woman’s career these delays in childbirth have helped narrow the pay gap.”

In the end we might never quite know what the exact reason is for the large difference in wages between the genders. Whether is lies in old beliefs about the roles of each gender and what is expected out of them or whether it has to do with the biology of the genders and what each one is capable of.

Tuesday I attend the deliberation Make America (Immi) Great Again and they focus on three different approaches to immigration. The deliberation drew a large audience from both the public and the school. They focused on regulated immigration, restricted immigration, and unregulated immigration. And laid out the policy information that came with each immigration policy choice. They started off by asking our relation to this topic. And proceeded to lay out the information before it started to be an audience discussion.

On the first topic of regulated immigration that was a lot of spark that was created in the audience over the idea of the programs used during the Obama administration such as DREAM which allowed illegal immigrants that had completed high school in the United States to apply for the citizenship which would then also be giving to those member of their family. Multiple people brought up different takes on how to implement this policy and some changes that could be made to the policy. Despite them often having contradicting beliefs on immigration they tended to have the same belief incentive for skilled and educated immigrants. I tended to disagree with those who want to lower the deportation policy and allow for illegal immigrants to stay here.

On the second approach of restricted immigration many of the public did not support this policy by any means. Arguing that they are coming here for jobs and the process this too bureaucratic as it is and that should not increase. While a few argued that would should have tighter caps on the amount of immigrants allowed into this country and address loopholes that have been exploited. I picked up on many different position during the discussion of this topic and understood were many people’s political views tended to land. But during this approach the conversation did get hijacked by the audience which prevent the speakers from talking and many others who had differing opinions to speak. The moderator did not do a very good job of preventing the audience from ganging up on a person for his views or from a couple people from hogging the conversation.

The final approach that was brought up that night was the unrestrictive immigration policy which many people were apart of but I was not the biggest fan of this policy. It would allow open border for anybody to come into this country and would be able to monitor where these people go or who they are letting in. but many people brought up the point that you can’t tell people that there aren’t allowed to come into this country. Others brought up the open-borders policy that European countries have and what has happened in those countries like the Paris bombing and, the raping of women in Germany, and the Sweden become the country with the second most rapes in it since it took in a large amount of immigrants.

In the end the Deliberation may have had a good planning scheme at first but as the debate went on it got out of control. People were not following the guidelines that they had set out and were not respectful to others as they were trying to speak. People were getting cut off and others kept trying to tell people there point is not valid. Also the conversation tended to be more one sided toward a very liberal point of view. Many of the more liberal ideal people tend to cut off those of a conservative point of view. Final people didn’t want to listen to the facts that people were saying and it turned out to be a kind of s**t show.

The armed forces have been around for the long haul in the United States and has had many different rules and regulations. Regulations about race, gender, sexual orientation, and age have changed over the history of the armed forced but only one of those regulations has created debate for quite some time and even after it was changed. That regulation is gender and it had brought about a lot of debate in the 2000’s. From World War II women have served some role in the armed forces first being put into auxiliary units and that lasted all the way up into 2015 where the US armed forces combat positions were opened up to any women who could met the standards.  According to http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/12/03/carter-telling-military-open-all-combat-jobs-women/76720656/ “in effect, Carter’s decision will open to women about 220,000 jobs in all, or about 10 percent of the entire active and reserve force. Most of those jobs are in Army and Marine Corps infantry and armor units.” Until then women were not allowed to be part of any combat mission or hold a position related to combat. Women had been separated from the rest of the men serving in the armed forced despite their willingness to join up and be part of them. Those who passed the physical requirements and the tests were still deemed not fit for combat duty. How the feel could that be if they passed all the tests and the requirements that the men had done? Why did it take so long for them to open up combat positions for women? They had been part of the armed forces since WW II and proved a vital part of the armed forces but neglected for so long.

The draft was another part of the armed forces that was unequal when you take a look at genders. The draft has been around since the civil war and men were the only ones who were ever legally required sign up. And even now women are still not required to sign up for the draft despite them participating in the roles of the armed forces for decades. Even other there were allowed to fill any combat role there were not required to sign up. So they technically cannot be forced to join the armed forces like men are in a time of need. Why haven’t they changed the law? Why women were never required to sign up for the draft if they are technically U.S. citizens like men? Many generals and other high ranking officers in all of the branches of the armed forced have been pushing for the change in the law. They want women to have to sign up for the draft just like men. But why won’t it change?

Another aspect of this gender issue is the requirement for men or women to pass in order to be part of a branch in the military. According to http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/05/gender-equality-a-double-standard-for-women-in-the-military/#ixzz4Xxt8wwFx “the U.S. Marine Corps announced that it was postponing its self-imposed deadline for women to be held to the same physical fitness standard as men. On January 1, 2014 female Marines would have been required to complete three pull ups on their physical fitness test; the same requirement as male Marines. Over 50 percent of women were unable to complete the new standard. Therefore, Marines chose to delay the deadline and allow women to pass without meeting the equal standard.” Seems unfair at first that they are having a double standard for men and women but it is true when they discuss that there are physically different. But is it truly unfair for them to make a unified standard for both men and women? They talk about equality but you have different standards for men and women. That’s is the real issue because then you just keep going around and around in a circle and never get anywhere. Yeah you make a right turn instead of a left and boom your backing to making a circle in a different direction. One thing is not changing and that is stopping the civic issue of gender inequality in the armed forces now a day.

In the end things will eventually change after enough controversy but as of now that’s how the military is doing things and it will probably stay that way for a while. Fair or not that’s how it will be. Do you think it is fair? Is there too many double standards when it comes to military and gender?

In the eyes of the law are we truly created equality? Are we looked at through the same looking glass? Right now people are having some debate about just that. Gender is right at the front of all this along with other key factors. But are we seeing gender be a reason as a difference in what certain charges are pressed, the time they serve, and study of their behavior. People may not have noticed it or had no clue what was going on but now they do and it is an issue. But to get to the root of this issue we have to look at the study of their behavior and the crimes they commit. This is otherwise known as the criminology aspect of the justice system. Most reason so to why people commit crimes and the theories behind it are actually based off of studies of males and not females. It wasn’t until lately that there was an increase in female criminology. Thus women were judged of the standard of why men committed crimes and were often not associated to why the main think of crime theories. That sparked the debate of why are we being based off of why you think crime is being committed for another gender. Take from a crim student (criminology/criminal justice) when I say that this is a topic that will be discussed for a while. As female criminology develops more and more the system will change and women will be judged on their own standard. And maybe it won’t but this debate will cause something to change. What might change is something is so vast and one might have their own opinions on where they see it going but it is something that we just have to wait for and see.

Who is charged with certain crimes is another thing that is debated on the lines of gender. Can men only commit sexual assault, aggravated assault, or robbery? Are women likely to be charged with the same crimes as a male? These are just same of the juicy topics people talk about when they think about gender in crime. But what is the chance that a male is charged with sexual assault rather than a women being charged? Statistically more men have been charged with sexual assault than women, but is something behind that. Is it because men are viewed as these certain things that cannot cry, have no compassion, and are just like animals. Men usually are the ones who get charged with sexual assault but it doesn’t mean woman don’t do it too. It also doesn’t mean that just because a woman/man accusing someone of sexual assault that they actually did it. But it is about who is believed in a court of law and how people view each gender. When looking at crime can you have these different looking glass? How much trouble has doing this caused both genders? Well according to https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/persons-arrested/persons-arrested men tend to cause more violent crime and property crime but despite that women as still being charge with the same crimes. But people ask why it that there is such a difference in how many men is and how many woman commit these crimes. Well that’s the hard part. There are more woman in this world so it makes you wonder. Do women just get away with these crimes or is it true like that say in criminology that many are very aggressive creatures and main contributors to violent crime. Or can woman get what they want without having to commit crime in the first place which would create such a gap.

When looking at http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/sociology/crime-and-deviance/who-commits-crime/ I found that it’s because of how men and women were raised as children. Men were supposed to make the money and be providers along with taking more risks. While women were more supervised and controlled so they couldn’t be as delinquent as boys were. But why was it okay for men to be delinquent and for women to not be delinquent?

This debate is something that will carry on for some time as along as crime is committed in the numbers that it has. People will always have questions and theories but who knows what the truth is. Why do you think that there is such a gap? Are women given more leeway when some crime is committed or are Men just that much more violent? Should things change?

Welcome to Sites At Penn State. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!