Powerful documentaries, investigations, opinions and inspiring content.
Live Mag UK has been empowering young people to tell the stories mainstream media can't reach since 2001. Never afraid to tell it how it is, we are a community of curious individuals united by a desire to uncover untold stories.
Aged 14-25? Create your story with us. Comment underneath videos and come down to Live Mag UK to meet the team.
I'm not even a minute in and I'm sorry but if you're making a video to explain something that you clearly don't understand yourself and are struggling to explain, and even admit you're still learning, it's not something I'll be watching.
Ok can I just represent this with a scale |--------------------| So back in the 1930’s there was a very well known female inequality so we use our scale to represent this inequality; |--👩------------👨--| But, over the last century this gap was slowly closed and women were given more opportunities like a balanced education, job opportunities etc. |--------👨👩------| But soon enough people would realise STEM jobs (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) were mostly men, while non STEM jobs such as teaching, nursing and other job’s were had women. It’s surprising to hear that on average, boys and men have lower average grades than women. So in jobs like teaching etc it’s harder for men to flourish in an environment with less men to look up to, although it may be the same for women in STEM jobs, boys grow up in an environment where they are increasingly surrounded by female teachers, and with no men to look up to, boys would continue to lack behind in stuff like grades and average test scores. And it’s like we are blind to our future, being to focused on stuff such as humanities future. But within a decade or so, woman will become the breadwinners of most families and dads could end up getting the short end of the stick and looked down upon. Now, I’m not saying woman and girls are going to take over the working world, I’m just addressing the fact that if we don’t stop get our crap together, it’ll be like the 1930’s again but now men get less of a choice Now, face-bookers / twitterers smite me!
I think the people that have lived through the challenges many of these areas have experienced should not then be forced out when those challenges begin to subside, but sadly that’s what happens.
I just made a mini doc on a super successful director (Creds: Polo G, ASAP Ferg, Ty Dolla Sign etc) and he gave lots of useful advice in it - if you have a min, check it out 🙏
There is lots of girls here in miami that want to go out with one of you guys so you can give that girl that changes and i love you guys but i love prodigy the most out of all of you and you are cool prodigy and be yourself as will 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎 and i love mindless behaviour too
When analysing a set of stat's, it is not possible to avoid the question WHY? And every time I see this type of narrative on youtube ... They never do ask "why?" ... I wonder why?
I think with our generation is that we are at the beginning of the transition out of the idea that women stay with their parents until they get married, then they stay home look after their husbands, then become a mother, stay home look after her children, stay home, clean, cook and look after her husband, stay home, grow old, stay home and die. That was the norm for hundreds of years. Now more opportunities are starting to open up to women but we still have this idea that women are housewife's and mothers. That is our job life. It was only 100 years ago that women had to really fight just to vote. So its pretty assumable that its gonna take another 100 years for women to start being seen as equal.
Interesting perspective on what other uses a cereal can have, which by the way, would not be highly recommended for health if they have sugar. If I understand what you are saying correctly, women should earn the same as men for the same position, and they should also occupy the same percentage of the "top" positions, and if we achieve that equality of outcomes, we will have a more "just" world, right?, at the same time you totally discards the impact of men's disadvantages in the educational system, but it doesn't matter, because in some places equal outcomes are a must, but in other places it is not necessary, right? Let's start with a small mental exercise, you have two football players for the same position, but one trains for longer, invents new moves, takes more risks on the playground, scores more goals, and attracts more people in each match than the other player, are you going to pay both players the same (i.e. equal outcomes discarding the performance in the position)? why would that create a more "just" society? Now another little mental exercise continuing with the context of football players, now you have men's football, and women's football, why don't women compete against men and on the contrary, have a separate league? the answer is quite simple, men and women have a sufficiently different biology to produce differences between both sexes. On average, men are stronger, faster, have faster reflexes, have better spatial orientation and are more competitive than women. That is in the average, but if you go to the top of those characteristics, the differences are accentuated, a "top" woman may probably can beat an "average" man, but she will not be able to beat a "top" man. That is why separate leagues are created, the differences in performance are significant so that it is better that they do not compete directly (and if they do, the men would always win, unless of course they are not allowed to win). So, men play football better and create a better show that attracts much more people than women's football, would you pay both sexes the same (i.e. equal outcomes discarding the performance in the position)? why would that create a more "just" society? To finish, another small mental exercise, but changing profession, let's go to medicine now, you have two cardiac surgeons, one of them works longer hours, is a better surgeon (a much higher rate of recoveries and a much lower rate of deaths), is willing to take over the riskiest surgeries and is constantly updating himself, while the other surgeon is not as good (more death rate), works less hours, and is a bit outdated. Now, let's assume that we live in a "just" world of equal outcomes, you need a heart surgery, and the only thing you know about those surgeons is that; i. both occupy the same position (i.e. both are cardiac surgeons), and ii. both earn the same, therefore, with that data you would choose both with the same probability, right? That's the "just" right? So from what I understand, you expect that those biological differences, which for example are clearly manifested in sports, are not manifested in the work environment, right? for example, it doesn't matter if men take more risks, work longer hours, do the riskiest jobs, are willing to relocate, are more competitive, all that doesn't matter right? the outcomes have to be the same, right? that's a "just" society, right? .. by the way, that's why there are more male surgeons than women.. so please, if you are unlucky enough to need a surgery, in the name of justice, choose the woman, that leaves me a free place with a man, I clearly prefer to have the surgery with him .. meritocracy is better for my health, not equality of outcomes ..
i don't agree with it but i can understand them sacking pregnant women because why pay people for having time off when you can pay for full time workers
Mate stfu you uneducated twat, the ''pay gap'' has been disproved and is actually just the fact that men work longer hours, overtime and more dangerous jobs.
