Japan Gender Gap “Worst” Amongst Top Nations

That doesn't make any sense, if that were true that most of the Islamic nations and African nations would be up at the top not at the bottom.

Also technically the EU or European Union would be the richest not the poorest. Which probably is why they are at the top of the list.

Another thing South Africa is one the richest areas of Africa. So that totally devotes your whole statement AGAIN.

Another point would be how much of this is based on population as in China's example the population is largely male. Females probably bridge the gap because they are in limited supply able to become married to those who can afford them, pamper them, or promote them.

Sorry, I dont fully understand what this survey/report is. Too lazy to click link and go to the direct result but Im understanding that this was a ranking of equal distribution of resources between the male/female population in the world? Is that right? If so, this list is fair from accurate with South Africa up there...

Or is it a ranking of male/female disparity in population?

And is it Scepticism or Skepticism...?

Arrigato Gousaimazu

Why even comment if you're too lazy to understand?

Anyway; http://www.weforum.org/pdf/gendergap/report2009.pdf should cast some light on what the report is and isn't and why developing countries can rank higher than industrialized.

"There are three basic concepts underlying the Global
Gender Gap Index. First, it focuses on measuring gaps
rather than levels. Second, it captures gaps in outcome
variables rather than gaps in means or input variables.
Third, it ranks countries according to gender equality
rather than women’s empowerment."

Hahaha you should see britain then, Gordon brown borrows none stop as if it's the only way to get money. We're paying more on interest of loans than we are on schools or the NHS (one of those anyway) thanks to that dumb fat bastard. Money down the drain to repay other people cos he spends all he can, then borrows to spend more and when there's another problem he'll borrow and spend again.

What the hell does any of that have to do with the article?

@ Downvoted anonymous saying europeans are responsible with money.

Greece.

why u feed the troll :<
just ignore it, like the one above

Indeed. Why? man, I'm glad I live in Norway. ^^ Oh,and I have no idea why my comment under this one ended up so far down.

Hate to say this but in most countries a feminist group is or has been needed. Let's take Sweden for example, in 1928 feminist groups fought for equal rights and got something pretty important throught. Female's were allowed to vote in elections.

Some contries where equality hasn't gone as far as sweden actually do need a feminist movement. We tend to take equal rights for granted.

And besides. not all feminist groups are militant, lesbians or hate men. they just want a longer time off after child birth for example, or the same salory for the same job as a male.

We had to learn it the hard way;
In Iceland the feminist movement started a political party, The Woman´s List.

The party made it into Alþingi(the icelantic Parliament.) with a few seats but when the female voters started bringing there problems to the party it was reveled that the party was only going to fight for women´s rights for the upper classes.

This is the reason that both genders look down on feminism in Iceland.

Failure to correct failure. :V

WRONG! There is one "girls" and one "grils" in the original comment.

OBJECTION! There is only one girls in USA.

SUSTAINED! For being utterly wrong, yet fittingly funny

Well, most of the survey's on SanKaku Con fail to explain the criteria. If the only criteria is "How closely women's salaries match men's salaries" then it's obvious why Japan is so much lower.

Another thing that isn't clear is why Artefact, the author chooses to post articles and then complain that the information he posted is invalid or not useful.

It's like saying: "here is my post. Now let me tell you why it is irrelevant"

No, it's like saying, "Here's a bullshit report. Read and laugh at the idiots."

Well anon 10:00, you would be more satisfied id he left it as "fact"? Or are would you rather he not post at all?

Either way I disagree with you complaint.

I agree that he (she? I still dunno.) posts these types of articles to make a statement and then sometimes in that statement, if it turns to be false, can be turned to show how even official reports of the UN or whatever economic federation/formation/federati can be wrong; I suppose.

All in all, it makes for good news because it makes for a read which makes for a comment.

funny how this obvious joke gets a low rating, when honest and sincere racism against japan or korea gets thumbs up and pats on the back. this new rating system, huge success huh

Anon samefag butthurt for thumbs down?

Yup. Huge success

Yeah.

Who was it that were FORCED TO FIGHT and were DYING OVERSEAS during Every Frigging War Since the Dawn of Time, eh?

I'm not saying that they're not productive, but that they're unfairly more protected and valued higher compared to men, while men are the ones getting the harder grunt work.

That may be because we give children. It may seem chauvinist, but it can be seen as a genetic pool menthality thing ( a buch of women + a man can repopulate while a bunch of men and one woman cant). there was an article floating in the internet that explained it clearly.

heh anon 10:12 is kinda right.

Wasn't there a king or what they were called where he impregnated many women(don't know i think there were 100 of them) to have children with him and help the population to grow?

I know i heard this,but can't remember who it was again.

but in this day of aids/hiv i don't know how much something like that would work again.

But then again i know what they say all about hiv and all,but how much would that actualy affect people.

Could it be possible to have sex with 100 women and not have a single case of hiv?

Which proves my point. Women are valued higher, while men can literally be (and have been) thrown away like trash. In our modern world of today, at least in Western societies, men simply aren't receiving the social respect they deserve for what they've done, in an ironic twist of reverse sexism. Women even have more socially-accepted options of dress and mannerisms than men.

DON'T ANY WOMAN DARE say that they've got it harder than men, because no woman ever came home from "their shore of the war" looking like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS1dO0JC2EE

I'm for GENDER EQUALITY, not traditional religious (male-dominant) or scientific (female-dominant) standpoints. That means in times of war, WE BOTH get drafted and in times of peace, WE BOTH can work AND/OR stay home and raise children.

You totally forget that partisan militias during WWII consisted almost 50% of women. As a present example, female soldiers are FORCED TO FIGHT and are DYING in the Israeli army...

Also, it's not that women are incapable of doing the oh-so-important jobs men did in the past, it's just that nobody let them.

now why did i never hear about women partisans even if they were in my country.

True, but partisan militias don't fight frontline combat in trenches. And yes, female soldiers do fight in the Israeli army, and it's a good example of the gender equality I admire. However, it wouldn't come as any surprise if delegation of tasks kept them out of frontline fire. So from my viewpoint, Israel's policy is gender equality. Hooray.

It would seem for the rest of the world it's a different story, no?

And come on, SERIOUSLY how many women would have been eager to jump into the trenches had the army opened applications to them? Some men felt the same way as women and definitely didn't want to go, but they didn't have a choice.

Because you're uninformed.

Insilencio: please don't use terms like "reverse sexism" to describe this sort of situation. It makes you look ignorant, which is a damn shame because you've made an excellent point.

It's just "sexism," plain and simple.

Whoops, the "uninformed" comment was aimed at Fonzer.

^
Because maternal contribution to the offspring is much greater than paternal contribution. Women have to PHYSICALLY carry the fetus whereas men are free to leave. Therefore, from a biological stand point, the females have a larger contribution to the continuation of a species thus have a higher value. From a psychological stand point, I don't think a lot of guys would like to be protected by women than to protect them. Our pride just don't really allow that to happen.

Speaking of female soldiers, any nice gallery to share? :D

Sorry, I just used the term "reverse sexism" with the connotation that people usually think of sexism as "men keeping the women down."

Yes, it's just sexism, plain and simple.

Yep, partisan militias usually fight behind enemy lines. How is that any less worth than "frontline" combat?

@G4tsu:
http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2008/10/03/gun-girl-gallery/
springs to mind, but
http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2009/10/01/huge-military-parade-marks-chinas-60-years-of-communism/
might be of interest too (just scroll down a little for even better view :)

@ Insilencio

I agree with some of your points, but I have to say that much of the 'men have done more' is because of that fact that in most patriarchal structured societies women weren't allowed to do most of the jobs. And most of this is because of the fact that women were valued higher for the reasons previously listed. But in these societies it was the men that made these rules.

You initial post has a very sexist tone to it. 'Why are women valued more when men have clearly done more to deserve being of a higher value', That is generally what comes out from reading it. I just wanted to point this out, I don't know if you intended to have it sound this way or not but based on your other posts it doesn't seem so.

Although I have an anti-war view of things, I would more like to see that service be a strictly voluntary thing, rather than a draft of everyone, I think if it were structured this way there would be a more equal ratio of men an women serving. Another thing you need to take into account though is that the guidelines are much more strict for women entering into the armed forces, at least in the US, and since there are less women volunteering the number allowed in is even less. So again we have a case where a male dominated facet of society forces inequality.

I'm all for sexual equality, I think that for almost every task there are men and women equally suited to it.

Glad to see some nice healthy discussion on Sankaku lol