I'm pretty salty at the moment cause I'm late for a lab which is pretty much a useless lab. There's no reason to even go to these labs unless you need help. My first semester prof was like, "just come for the attendance, leave and submit it later if you want. But my second semester was like "I'm sorry, you're late i can't allow you to sign the attendance....

Like can they actually do w/e they want? I was never late to any previous ones and I had reasons.... family reasons and i tried to make it but nope. I know it's only 1% and it's nbd but still.... Like some girls in other courses did some fake tears to my math prof and got to write a test on another day without a MSAF... It was worth 13.33% and mines only 1% but like wtf...

I don't think they can do "whatever they want" but they are instructors of their respective courses so in that sense, it is their choice on how strict to be with course content/attendance. While this may not seem 'fair' in comparison with courses you've taken previously, if the professor is being strict with everyone, that's just the way he/she is and there's not much you can do about that. But if you feel a certain prof is showing favouritism to a certain group of students, go talk to the associate dean of the faculty the course is in.

Can girls cry their way out even if they failed a course?

If the rules were in writing and they choose to enforce it, then its fair game.

We've all been there, no big deal.

Can girls cry their way out even if they failed a course?

Doubt any serious prof will risk losing their job for some poontang.

Originally Posted by MovingTarget

I don't think they can do "whatever they want" but they are instructors of their respective courses so in that sense, it is their choice on how strict to be with course content/attendance. While this may not seem 'fair' in comparison with courses you've taken previously, if the professor is being strict with everyone, that's just the way he/she is and there's not much you can do about that. But if you feel a certain prof is showing favouritism to a certain group of students, go talk to the associate dean of the faculty the course is in.

Yep, it really depends on the prof. For small classes (ex. Sanskrit), the prof accommodates people without using an MSAF (ex. wedding on the day of a quiz, too many deadlines to complete an assignment, etc.). I had a similar experience with a geo course where the class size was about ~100 and the prof said we can change around the midterm days, assignment deadlines, you can miss a lab without submitting an MSAF, etc. I think profs are very lenient when your in small classes but in large class sizes (first year bio, chem, etc.) they're very strict.

Originally Posted by stars

Can girls cry their way out even if they failed a course?

Girls can get away with alot of things in life, but they also get paid less.

You win some, you lose some.

Originally Posted by Allan

Girls can get away with alot of things in life, but they also get paid less.

You win some, you lose some.

Uh, yeah, they get paid the same.

Originally Posted by kakarot

Uh, yeah, they get paid the same.

Umm...look at the statistics.

Haven't you heard of the "Equal Pay for Equal Work" movement?

Originally Posted by Allan

Umm...look at the statistics.

Haven't you heard of the "Equal Pay for Equal Work" movement?

Not always the case.

Actually there's a theory going around in the ministry of labor that it's for the best, because if all women got the same salary as men, most companies would go bankrupt yesterday. To avoid that, they would need to lower the entire salary spectrum and bring down everyone's quality of life which I bet most of you wouldn't be happy about.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLucas

Not always the case.

Actually there's a theory going around in the ministry of labor that it's for the best, because if all women got the same salary as men, most companies would go bankrupt yesterday. To avoid that, they would need to lower the entire salary spectrum and bring down everyone's quality of life which I bet most of you wouldn't be happy about.

The ministry of labour, which is run primarily by men.

And in order to achieve equality while paying the same overall amount, women's salaries would increase while men's salaries would decrease. So it wouldn't bring down "everyone's" QOL, unless your interpretation of "everyone" is "men".

I think it was only last year that McMaster looked at how their female profs were paid compared to male profs, taking into account different disciplines, tenure, research funding, etc and found that they were still paid less. Then, they increased the salaries of all female profs by the average difference.

I'm not convinced that's the best way of doing things, but I was surprised to find that there was actually a difference. I thought salaries would be more transparent than that.

Originally Posted by starfish

The ministry of labour, which is run primarily by men.

And in order to achieve equality while paying the same overall amount, women's salaries would increase while men's salaries would decrease. So it wouldn't bring down "everyone's" QOL, unless your interpretation of "everyone" is "men".

I think it was only last year that McMaster looked at how their female profs were paid compared to male profs, taking into account different disciplines, tenure, research funding, etc and found that they were still paid less. Then, they increased the salaries of all female profs by the average difference.

I'm not convinced that's the best way of doing things, but I was surprised to find that there was actually a difference. I thought salaries would be more transparent than that.

I'm a simple man how judges things based on my experience. So far based on what I've seen in Engineering, out of 5 women I worked with, 1 was an amazing professional, 4 were escaping work (1 was cheating her way through).

So the question is, do women that are getting paid less work as they should, or are they there simply because the companies need to fill female quota?

Originally Posted by GeorgeLucas

I'm a simple man how judges things based on my experience. So far based on what I've seen in Engineering, out of 5 women I worked with, 1 was an amazing professional, 4 were escaping work (1 was cheating her way through).

So the question is, do women that are getting paid less work as they should, or are they there simply because the companies need to fill female quota?

Yes, because your experience with five people can easily be generalized to the rest of the university, city, province, country, world.

Even if you accept that it could be generalized, one could also ask the flip question - if you were getting paid less than your male coworkers, would you want to put in as much work as them, or would you put in less work since no matter what, you'll get paid less?

i heard some girl who failed a course but eventually the prof passed her because she cried in his office....

Originally Posted by GeorgeLucas

I'm a simple man how judges things based on my experience. So far based on what I've seen in Engineering, out of 5 women I worked with, 1 was an amazing professional, 4 were escaping work (1 was cheating her way through).

So the question is, do women that are getting paid less work as they should, or are they there simply because the companies need to fill female quota?

Not sure if that's really saying anything. Kind of a small sample size.
I think if we picked 5 random guys in any class...we could end up with the same result.

I don't believe companies are hiring to fill a male/female quota, they are hiring based on skills/talent as they are profit-driven firms. On the other hand, government organizations certainly hire to fill quotas for diversity, which I don't believe is right. Just look at how Justin Trudeau chose his cabinet.

I work in a company that is quite diversified, and that provides a workforce with a good variety of skills. I find that women are typically more organized, and also have better interpersonal skills. I see them as equals, and they should be paid accordingly. If someone contributes less, then sure, they should be paid less, but from what I've seen, it has nothing to do with sex.

In my opinion, women get paid less because they have less bargaining power. They have to deal with a 'problem' called getting pregnant. Which unfortunately, is frowned upon amongst managers. When women have children, they end up missing time from work, and fall behind their male counterparts. Similarly, I think women are also willing to work for a slightly less money since they understand that employers must accommodate their pregnancies.

Sorry for the long post.