But, as I get to notice it via statistics, I get to notice it's better to judge this via how things are structured locally. For example, in West Germany it still is like a relatively common thing, statistically, that women mostly work part-time and the main income is generated by their husbands. In East Germany, this isn't like that. Origin of that is West Germany's deeply conservative past (which also lied in its structure of everything). It still can be found within its economical and society structures that the liberation of women, as the Communist block has seen it, never took place there.
The big trouble that I have with these data is where I get to check them out and what people conclude out of that in their deep ignorance about the East: They get to just put the stamp on it "aw, yeah, women don't really want to work if they got a big income generator - they only do this because they're bored; and this is a natural thing". This is only true for West Germany! This data that women work mostly only part-time because they don't want to work more hours, that's a West German syndrome! (Btw, that's why traditionally West German wages are way higher than in East Germany - it also originates in tha time still as th husband was the main income generator and one income needed to feed a whole family.)
By people totally forgetting to put the East into its bill and its judgment over things, they do something that's clearly a filter bubble thing. Because they're mostly used to women which behave parasite-like or like sensitve plants that you literally kick into doing something which they actually don't want, they think that this is a standard and it's "woman's nature".
If you know the statistics of East Germany and why they're different from their own, that it's a systematic thing resulting from a development that East Germany made, but West Germany didn't, then you know - not only how much bullshit that generalization is, but also how much you better shouldn't take those things and proportions that you know as self-evident.
Which brings me back to this topic from this post now - I don't know it with different circumstances. For "my world", it's "low unemployment gets covered with part-time/low-wage-jobs and-job-creation measures". The myth demystified, so to say. But I don't know if person's like me are the audience the PR-propaganda-news about low unemployment appeal to. If there's still another world, another structure, for which the myth "unemployment is the fault of your own laziness" still somehow applies in the average citizen's worldview... (Because the overall structure functions differently, so that this superficially still may appear as true.)
no subject
But, as I get to notice it via statistics, I get to notice it's better to judge this via how things are structured locally.
For example, in West Germany it still is like a relatively common thing, statistically, that women mostly work part-time and the main income is generated by their husbands.
In East Germany, this isn't like that.
Origin of that is West Germany's deeply conservative past (which also lied in its structure of everything).
It still can be found within its economical and society structures that the liberation of women, as the Communist block has seen it, never took place there.
The big trouble that I have with these data is where I get to check them out and what people conclude out of that in their deep ignorance about the East: They get to just put the stamp on it "aw, yeah, women don't really want to work if they got a big income generator - they only do this because they're bored; and this is a natural thing".
This is only true for West Germany!
This data that women work mostly only part-time because they don't want to work more hours, that's a West German syndrome!
(Btw, that's why traditionally West German wages are way higher than in East Germany - it also originates in tha time still as th husband was the main income generator and one income needed to feed a whole family.)
By people totally forgetting to put the East into its bill and its judgment over things, they do something that's clearly a filter bubble thing. Because they're mostly used to women which behave parasite-like or like sensitve plants that you literally kick into doing something which they actually don't want, they think that this is a standard and it's "woman's nature".
If you know the statistics of East Germany and why they're different from their own, that it's a systematic thing resulting from a development that East Germany made, but West Germany didn't, then you know - not only how much bullshit that generalization is, but also how much you better shouldn't take those things and proportions that you know as self-evident.
Which brings me back to this topic from this post now - I don't know it with different circumstances.
For "my world", it's "low unemployment gets covered with part-time/low-wage-jobs and-job-creation measures".
The myth demystified, so to say.
But I don't know if person's like me are the audience the PR-propaganda-news about low unemployment appeal to.
If there's still another world, another structure, for which the myth "unemployment is the fault of your own laziness" still somehow applies in the average citizen's worldview... (Because the overall structure functions differently, so that this superficially still may appear as true.)