home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
- Path: sparky!uunet!UB.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu!garrod
- From: garrod@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (David Garrod)
- Subject: Re: Sexual Discrimination
- Message-ID: <1993Jan28.000333.6218@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>
- Sender: news@noose.ecn.purdue.edu (USENET news)
- Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
- References: <1993Jan26.085757.6320@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> <C1HtrE.C9w@panix.com> <C1J8Mu.4rv@apollo.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:03:33 GMT
- Lines: 65
-
- In article <C1J8Mu.4rv@apollo.hp.com>, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
- > In article <2527@newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca> bouche2@server.uwindsor.ca (BOUCHER DAVID ) writes:
- >
- > >I took his question to be "Is this statistic EVIDENCE that men are
- > >denied equal protection?" The answer to that question is undeniably YES.
- >
- > I deny it, so it's not undeniable. It's not evidence, or at least
- > good evidence of *anything* without having more information. As I
- > said before, U.S. EE's are overwhelmingly white males. Is this
- > "evidence" or "EVIDENCE" of discrimination by companies that employ
- > them? No. It doesn't rule out discrimination but it's hardly evidence
- > of it. There could be any number of cultural or other factors.
- >
- To some extent, I agree with you. However, there is difference
- between EEs and divorcing parents. In terms of people studying
- EE, white males start out dominating the statistics so pure
- numbers are obviously going to be dominated by white males.
- For parents, however, they start out exactly equal in numbers,
- and women end up about 10:1 with custody.
- (I took EE to mean Electrical Engineering major, not Elementary
- Education major.....otherwise your arguments ain`t true to start with.)
- >
- > >But it is not the LAW that "treats people differently", it is the manner
- > >in which the law is ENFORCED. If there is a law against loitering, but
- Agreed, that`s what the bitching is about.
- > >only blacks are arrested for violating that law while whites are set free
- > >with a nod and a wink, then surely the law enforcement officers would be
- > >guilty of discrimination.
- >
- > But your analogy isn't exact since it has two independent variables
- > -- who gets arrested and who gets set free. The custody data that
- > prompted this post only had one : the percentage of men awarded
- > custody.
- >
- The posting had data for percentage of male custody and
- percentage of female custody.
-
- > So a better analogy would be what if we noted that 75% of
- > loitering arrests were of blacks? Does this show evidence
- > of discrimination?
- >
- > And the answer is no. What if we were looking at statistics
- > for loitering arrests in a place that was predominantly black?
- > or What if blacks, due to higher unemployment, really DO loiter
- > more often? (etc).
- >
- Again note the starting point - equal males and females
- There is an initial constraint of equality of numbers.
-
- There is an out for the judges: We were only doing what is in the
- best interest of the children and "usually" mothers are better nurturers
- than fathers.
-
- OK. Now take these statistics:
-
- In Indiana, the laws are sex neutral. The laws also state that a child
- support order be made, with a minimum of $25/week for one child.
-
- The statistics are when a father gets custody, only 48% of the
- time will he get support from the mother. When a mother gets
- custody 99.6% of the time she gets support from the mother.
-
- Explain that without using, any concept of sexual bias.!!
-
- David Garrod
-