From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: More Hallucinations (was: Women as Victims)
Date: 9 Oct 92 00:26:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <MUFFY.92Oct8101215@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>
>I don't see d mentioning any "conspiracy."  It doesn't take a conspiracy
>for individual businesses to see what is (or isn't) good for them, and
>act accordingly.  All d is pointing out is that it is pretty easy to see
>that it would not, in fact, be good for businesses to hire a lot of
>women because they are cheaper, to the point where they dump the men for
>the women, because the men are the executives, who decide how much
>people get paid, and if they gave a lot of women this power, some of
>those women would use it to equalize salaries, and the companies
>wouldn't be saving money anymore.

Let's see: male executives (somehow) all see to it that women are paid
less than they're worth, but if those same executives were female, then
men and women would end up being paid the same. This sure SOUNDS like a 
conspiracy theory to me!

In fact, the whole fable of women being 'paid less than they're worth'
DOES indeed comply a "conspiracy among males" to enforce it. This would
create a situation in which it would be IN EACH PARTY'S INTEREST to
cheat. In a situation where A,B,C, etc have agreed to cheat women by
paying them less than they are worth, it is in the interest of each
to cheat on the agreement by hiring the best-qualified women, if necessary
at slightly more than the cartel's price. If women are supposedly paid
only 59% of what they are worth, it would be in each company's
interest to get the *best* female workers and to replace males by
them, even if they had to pay 60%, 65%, or whatever of their "fair
market" value. Of course, economic pressure would quickly drive the
differential to zero. It's the same situation with OPEC: each country
has agreed to pump "only" a certain number of barrels of oil, and
at a fixed price. However, it is in the interest of each country to
cheat on the agreement, by selling a MORE barrels than the agreed
number, which they must discount to take business from other OPEC
members. As a consequence, cheating is rampant, and
the OPEC "conspiracy" really isn't very
effective. And look at how much time and effort they put into
maintaining it! Now, where are the *secret conspirators* who venture
forth between the great American corporations, asking "is anybody
here *cheating* on our agreement to shaft women???"

> So, this is simply a counter to
>Robert Sheaffer's claim that it can't be true that women make less
>because they aren't hired in droves by companies seeking to make money.
>The suggestion is not a conspiracy, but the concept that companies can
>look a little farther into the possible effects of such an action than
>Robert apparently can.

Yes, apparently the Conspirators can forsee the horrible egalitarian
consequences of their own company cheating on the general agreement to
cheat women, and each magnanimously decides to forego immediate corporate 
profit to promote long-term common goals.

>
>I don't really think, though, that this is the idea.  I think that it's
>more a resistance to change and a real belief on the part of the people
>doing the hiring, salary setting, etc., that women are less competent
>and worth less.  This isn't a conspiracy, it's a society, and not a very
>good one.

*Chuckle* Those people would hire a four-foot slimey frog with
contagious carbuncles if they could save money by doing so.


-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men