absolution*
ymyum
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 3,474
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Im finished. If i dont get at least 17-18/20 someones gonna get stabbed.
-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
ECOP 1001 essay (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter korry
- Start date
I'm not writing right wing at all.melbournian said:Oh, you will soon lone.
First of all, criticising their 'evidence' is the most superficial criticism.
People who write right wing in ecop go crap, and end up droping it.
ecop has very much a formula to do well. I haven't quite mastered it, but am getting there lol
and all these first year people are so proactive.....i'm 4 weeks behind on notes, im 2 weeks behind on readings lol- wait to 2nd year, and you will realise that you can't be farked.....i seriously care more about going to the gym these days, than going to uni lol
I don't find criticising his evidence superficial as long as I have proof. He, for example, is writing about how women value their safety 5 times more then men. Then, he uses an out of date figure for how much men value their life. He also goes on to say practically no women were used in the studies to determine this at all. I looked up the study and it showed that men and women were used and women don't value their 'safety' much more then men.
absolution*
ymyum
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 3,474
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
I wrote something completely different to you. I debated his arguments rather than his sources.1Time4thePpl said:
absolution*
ymyum
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 3,474
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Heh, i SO win.1Time4thePpl said:
spin spin sugar
it's gotta be big
usyd is pretty famous for marking according to what they believe, not what is right
Did anyone else find that feminist article in the readings for this weeks tute really really really nauseating. I'm too pissed off to even point out all the flaws. I'm hoping i won't get slapped for being chavenistic tomorrow when I announced to the class that the comparisson in the beginning is almost funny. That the 'labor' of childbirth is a silly misappropriation as the word carries multiple meanings. I labored over my political economy essay. Crap, why aren't I included if I can somehow put labor into something that I do?
I don't think I'll mention the fact that guys actually work whilst the woman is at home with the child for extended hours in order to supply the family with goods and services the woman can use.
Sure, what the housewife does should be included in our economic analyses, but there's no need to grossly misdefine things.
She also fails to make a disitinction between developing and developed countries. About sociocultural beliefs in these nations as well. The workforce is about 50/50 in most developed countries for men and women atm. The pay (not sure about overseas, but in Australia) is very similar, with the gap closing every year. Women also get benefits for childbirth.
The opening comparisson is really hillarious. A woman from africa vs someone from a developed nation who could just as well be a woman. But no, in this example the person in the military couldn't possibly be *gasp* a woman! Women are incapable of cruelty.
The closing example once again was about men vs women in a country in which the gender inequality has been rooted since the dawn of time. In a millenium, I'm guessing they will be the same unless globalisation takes its extreme toll and capitalism reigns supreme.
I conclude by saying this: yes, many economists misdefine things. Their concern is money that is made through various markets. Feminists can help change attitudes of economists, but by writing an article such as this one, which in my opinion is laughable, they seem to give feminism a bad name. It's funny how I can stand for many principles of feminism. But it takes one really silly feminist who sees herself as mother superior to skew other people's attitudes towards the movement.
I don't think I'll mention the fact that guys actually work whilst the woman is at home with the child for extended hours in order to supply the family with goods and services the woman can use.
Sure, what the housewife does should be included in our economic analyses, but there's no need to grossly misdefine things.
She also fails to make a disitinction between developing and developed countries. About sociocultural beliefs in these nations as well. The workforce is about 50/50 in most developed countries for men and women atm. The pay (not sure about overseas, but in Australia) is very similar, with the gap closing every year. Women also get benefits for childbirth.
The opening comparisson is really hillarious. A woman from africa vs someone from a developed nation who could just as well be a woman. But no, in this example the person in the military couldn't possibly be *gasp* a woman! Women are incapable of cruelty.
The closing example once again was about men vs women in a country in which the gender inequality has been rooted since the dawn of time. In a millenium, I'm guessing they will be the same unless globalisation takes its extreme toll and capitalism reigns supreme.
I conclude by saying this: yes, many economists misdefine things. Their concern is money that is made through various markets. Feminists can help change attitudes of economists, but by writing an article such as this one, which in my opinion is laughable, they seem to give feminism a bad name. It's funny how I can stand for many principles of feminism. But it takes one really silly feminist who sees herself as mother superior to skew other people's attitudes towards the movement.
I want to minor in ecop. I don't think I should quit ecop. Because I disagree with a feminist who is very stupid? A lot of women in the class agreed here.
Yes, I agree with her underlying meaning but not in the way she makes analogies, interprets things and goes around being a .... woman.
The 50/50 thing is what the lecturer of WORK1001 told us. It's not exactly 50/50 but the gap is getting bridged with every year.
Yes, I agree with her underlying meaning but not in the way she makes analogies, interprets things and goes around being a .... woman.
The 50/50 thing is what the lecturer of WORK1001 told us. It's not exactly 50/50 but the gap is getting bridged with every year.
What a humerous comment meant to be taken in jest?melbournian said:
I agreed with what she raised about how most traditional female roles such as childbearing etc don't get 'valued' either in mainstream society or more specifically by economists.
Once again though, the way she expressed herself in the article (not sure if you have read it) is absolutely stupid. Her analogies, her defenitions, her ...well, everything.
Oh, and ill submit the ecop essay next week and you can have a read through it.
I can't see a reason for me dropping ecop. I can see myself being very good at the subject. I'm sure many of the readings were selected to spread a bit of debate around the place.
spin spin sugar
it's gotta be big
oh youre so wordy! it was great though
absolution*
ymyum
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 3,474
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
everyone post your marks