Women earn $0.77 for every $1 men earn.

[wrongpassword]

Women are generally valued less on the marketplace (as minorities, freaks, etc) because bosses subjectively value them less (or at least they know other bossies value them less so that their market value is lower than that of, let's say, males). It's mostly an assimetry of information "problem" that the economic rationality of the market would solve this way: bosses who "discover" that they can buy female worker at a cheaper price than male ones but without decreasing productivity would be praised on the market (lower costs, lower prices of your goods, or, in case of unchanged prices, higher returns). The signal would be noted on the market, eventually the marketed value of males would lower (competition), ergo your almighty equilibrium. Information would be updated because of bosses experiencing that females are more valuable workers than thought before. So let female prices fall, for female sake. Otherwise if the setting is libertarian, females could associate to work in only-females enterprises or secede XD!


Problem? It happened in the end of 19th century thanks to overproduction crises in Europe, do you know what has been the reaction of male workers? Mobbing against females, crying the corruption of familiar order, etc. Nothing so distant from what has be done toward minorities and immigrants. Rules to raise the minimum wage has been found good means to reduce females's invasion of the marketplace and the side effect of having to rethink family roles. Humans suck.

[DubFX]

There's so much sexism in this thread it hurts.

LOL, so true!

I don't think those guys hang around women very often.

I had few long term relationships and currently i'm in one so exclude me

[zhinkk]

I bet that ALOT of woman have hidden incomes from men in work but ofcourse they won't admit it.

That's disrespectful/sexist. Why would you assume "A LOT" of women offer sexual services? They have a self image to keep up too.

[DubFX]

I bet that ALOT of woman have hidden incomes from men in work but ofcourse they won't admit it.

That's disrespectful/sexist. Why would you assume "A LOT" of women offer sexual services? They have a self image to keep up too.

Well, i'm sorry for it but i had experience and heard/saw it quite alot times.

[zedicus]

Most of these effects go away once you adjust for years of experience and the job.  The latter is far more important than the former. 

I think this is exactly why women tend to make less then men in the workplace. It really has nothing to do with anything other then qualifications and experience. One way to explain the difference in experience is that women tend to take time off from work to raise a family and during this time off they are not gaining additional experience. Also when women  do return to work they have a much higher rate of changing career paths, resetting the total amount of related experience in a particular field.

[freehugs]

Most of these effects go away once you adjust for years of experience and the job.  The latter is far more important than the former. 

I think this is exactly why women tend to make less then men in the workplace. It really has nothing to do with anything other then qualifications and experience. One way to explain the difference in experience is that women tend to take time off from work to raise a family and during this time off they are not gaining additional experience. Also when women  do return to work they have a much higher rate of changing career paths, resetting the total amount of related experience in a particular field.

I think this more or less sums it up. By spending more time in the workforce men have more overall experience and more opportunities for advancement.

[TECSHARE]

Most of these effects go away once you adjust for years of experience and the job.  The latter is far more important than the former.  

I think this is exactly why women tend to make less then men in the workplace. It really has nothing to do with anything other then qualifications and experience. One way to explain the difference in experience is that women tend to take time off from work to raise a family and during this time off they are not gaining additional experience. Also when women  do return to work they have a much higher rate of changing career paths, resetting the total amount of related experience in a particular field.

I think this more or less sums it up. By spending more time in the workforce men have more overall experience and more opportunities for advancement.

Exactly. Just because there is a discrepancy automatically assuming it is because of sexism is unscientific at least and disingenuous at worst. I say this type of assumption is sexist against men. Having equality doesn't mean everything is exactly equal and the same like when you and your little sister argued about your toys and such. In reality no one is equal to anyone else, that's why they call us individuals.

Men work longer hours, and work in more dangerous jobs. They should be paid more for that risk, a risk most women clearly don't like taking in general. No one says they can't, but just because they aren't doesn't mean some shadowy unnamed misogynist boogeyman somewhere is stopping them.  

How many women can be contruction workers, handymen, plumbers, all that. I don't mean to be sexist in any way but that is how it should be. Men are expected to run the family anyways and pay for things.

Over 90% of all workplace deaths are men. Men are working more dangerous jobs, and working more hours. Why shouldn't they be paid more? This "women are paid less" thing is a myth. They don't do the same job, therefore they don't get paid the same. End of debate.

So, your saying since some men work more dangerous jobs, they should get paid more in a office job than a female office worker? My job isn't really that dangerous. Your being strictly biased if you think because there's a male construction worker, than a male office worker should get paid more than a female worker, because his gender takes on 'more dangerous jobs'.

Do you have any basic concept of how statistics and averages work or is that whole math thing not important to you when looking over statistics?
More men working dangerous jobs and longer hours = higher average pay.

 I don't know what your personal observations are, but that's all they are, personal observations (ie not statistically relevant). Just because women choose to work safer jobs with more flexible hours doesn't mean someone somewhere is oppressing them and preventing them from making more sacrifices to meet an equal pay level.

The Gender Equality Paradox - Documentary NRK - 2011  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70
In Norway, considered one of the most gender equal places on earth, in spite of extensive programs to create workplace gender diversity, what actually happened was when given more choices people actually separated by gender MORE. They also found that in developing economies there are an exceptional amount of female engineers and scientists. This leads one to the conclusion that those kind of jobs are taken as matter of economic necessity, not by choice. When all that is available is an engineering job, that is what you take like it or not.

The gender wage gap is a myth  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyFjPHwF6To

[counter]

Women are generally valued less on the marketplace (as minorities, freaks, etc)

Really "freaks,etc".  Not really a good way to make you point when you put women, blacks in the same category as "freaks & etc".  Maybe I'm missing your point but it is hard to take a post seriously after that first sentence.

[noviapriani]

I've gone over a number of those studies and they only really compare rough sectors (full time employment vs. part time employment seems to be the most common breakdown). So the "same pay for same work" line is really misleading. Sexism absolutely exists, but a lot of what hinders female professional development is having babies and a family. It creates other traditional duties for women (generally since women are more often relegated to such domestic responsibilities which I also think has a biological component associated with child rearing, but part is cultural as well) that prevent them from going the "extra mile" in their careers. It is tough to put in an 80 hour work week to get ahead when you have to take care of your children after they get home from school. You also have things like maternity leave, which isn't suppose to affect professional potential and advancement, but does. For really successful men they can get ahead AND have a family, for a lot of working women, there comes a point in their career where they have to choose between the two.

[sana8410]

problem with 'real' data is who is doing the collecting and editing and how honest are they?

Anymore can you really trust any 'data' that comes from any source that is has NOT been cherry picked, etc.


Fact is that women get pregnant and men do not and you would have to take every pregnancy or child care factor out of all the data in order for it to be more of an apple versus apple comparison then what it is now.

[noviapriani]

Fertility rates have a direct statistically significant correlation with relative wage earnings for women.

There are a lot of other factors though, sexism is one, and what I believe you are talking about: stream divergence or grouping of female labor into specific markets is another (though its impact varies by country). Of course one could make an argument that such grouping of female labor exists largely because of ingrained professional gender roles within society where women are culturally steered toward say nursing and teaching than they are to engineering, and tech fields. But I've never spent as much time looking at that discussion.

[umair127]

This argument has been made popular within the last year or so, and I haven't really done a lot of research into it this time around, but in the past when I saw this brought up, the data had ignored that men just tend to do jobs that are valued more by the market, and it wasn't necessarily an issue of sexism.

What I mean is that men do things like construction, crab fishing, trucking, plumbing, etc., things that women simply choose not to do. This can be because of social norms, but there's probably some biology to it, such as men generally being physically stronger than women and strength being something that's valuable when it comes to, say, lifting heavy shit? Fuck if I know. Anyway, women just don't do these jobs or go for them. Instead, they choose cushy office jobs, and many of them choose to be homemakers whereas fewer men choose cushy office jobs and being homemakers and teachers and shit.

So I'm wondering if this same counterargument applies today. When we talk about women making $0.77 for every $1 a man makes, is it for the same job? Does the study control for other variables?


Just to be clear, here, I completely agree that sexism is a very real problem in our culture, including the workplace. When women are assertive, they're called "bitchy" or "bossy" whereas men are "confident" or "possess leadership qualities" and so forth. I read about one study that showed biases in hiring managers, and even when they were made aware of their biases, they still fail to properly compensate for it. I agree that we live in a culture that blames rape victims for being raped. Etc. It's not much of a stretch for me to buy into this argument about how much women make vs how much men make. But I know that there have been problems with the argument in the past, and I wanna see someone back it up with real data.

I thought that statistic was long ago corrected to $0.95 for every $1 men earn. And I'm especially curious what this stat is for the millennial generation and beyond where women are graduating college at a significantly higher rate. Feminism is going to fuck over the next generation of men.

[sana8410]

Fertility rates have a direct statistically significant correlation with relative wage earnings for women.

There are a lot of other factors though, sexism is one, and what I believe you are talking about: stream divergence or grouping of female labor into specific markets is another (though its impact varies by country). Of course one could make an argument that such grouping of female labor exists largely because of ingrained professional gender roles within society where women are culturally steered toward say nursing and teaching than they are to engineering, and tech fields. But I've never spent as much time looking at that discussion.

You're always free to examine the data and look at the methodology yourself to find data sets that meet your standards. If you're willing to do your due diligence then yes. We have very good access to this data in the United States.

[zolace]

Fertility rates have a direct statistically significant correlation with relative wage earnings for women.

There are a lot of other factors though, sexism is one, and what I believe you are talking about: stream divergence or grouping of female labor into specific markets is another (though its impact varies by country). Of course one could make an argument that such grouping of female labor exists largely because of ingrained professional gender roles within society where women are culturally steered toward say nursing and teaching than they are to engineering, and tech fields. But I've never spent as much time looking at that discussion.

You're always free to examine the data and look at the methodology yourself to find data sets that meet your standards. If you're willing to do your due diligence then yes. We have very good access to this data in the United States.

I don't really know anything about how it's being used, but I could see there being a use for it to illustrate the ways in which men are treated unfairly in our culture and in the eyes of our laws.


I know a few women who didn't know that when everyone is given their papers to vote when they turn 18, boys are also a second packet to register with Selective Service so they can be enslaved by the government should the USA military need more cannon fodder.

[Rigon]

Who really gives a fat flying shit. I bet midgets on average make less than women, and blacks make less than Hispanics, who make less than midgets, but more than Native Americans.

[zolace]

It's not as big of deal anymore, but it obviously was throughout the 20th century. It wasn't just those who were enslaved either. Those who weren't enslaved were manipulated into it based on these barbaric notions of "honor" and "heroism" and so forth that go centuries back. "Brave" and "honorable" men fight for their land. Women might have been viewed as property, but men were viewed as less valuable than property, as they were expected to be willing to die to protect their property, their land, their country, etc. Men who weren't willing to die were labeled as cowards and ostracized; they were disowned, divorced, and died alone ... if they weren't immediately killed for their egregious crime of being risk averse.

[sana8410]

Fact is that women get pregnant and men do not and you would have to take every pregnancy or child care factor out of all the data in order for it to be more of an apple versus apple comparison then what it is now.

Good analysis does exactly this. Or rather doesn't rely on a single variable model and can see which explanatory variables most impact the constant variable. One might explain 7% of the differences seen in relative wage rates, another might explain 3%, etc

[zolace]

Fact is that women get pregnant and men do not and you would have to take every pregnancy or child care factor out of all the data in order for it to be more of an apple versus apple comparison then what it is now.

Good analysis does exactly this. Or rather doesn't rely on a single variable model and can see which explanatory variables most impact the constant variable. One might explain 7% of the differences seen in relative wage rates, another might explain 3%, etc

Getting back to the 20th century, and what still directly affects our culture today, is that if the men came back alive but injured or otherwise affected by the horrors of war, those whom they had the "honor" of "serving" would fight like hell to deny them treatment and care beyond that which was politically expedient. Once the wars were "over," everyone tries to forget about it. The former slaves receive substandard care if they receive any at all. These days they're fighting with backlogs and waiting lists that might take years before they get treatment.

This has created a culture wherein men are viewed as disposable. Men believe themselves to be disposable. And if they dare to assert their rights, then they're wimps, sissies, cowards, etc.

[sana8410]

Fact is that women get pregnant and men do not and you would have to take every pregnancy or child care factor out of all the data in order for it to be more of an apple versus apple comparison then what it is now.

Good analysis does exactly this. Or rather doesn't rely on a single variable model and can see which explanatory variables most impact the constant variable. One might explain 7% of the differences seen in relative wage rates, another might explain 3%, etc

Getting back to the 20th century, and what still directly affects our culture today, is that if the men came back alive but injured or otherwise affected by the horrors of war, those whom they had the "honor" of "serving" would fight like hell to deny them treatment and care beyond that which was politically expedient. Once the wars were "over," everyone tries to forget about it. The former slaves receive substandard care if they receive any at all. These days they're fighting with backlogs and waiting lists that might take years before they get treatment.

This has created a culture wherein men are viewed as disposable. Men believe themselves to be disposable. And if they dare to assert their rights, then they're wimps, sissies, cowards, etc.

Yesallmen is a feminist hashtag that some women use when complaining about things that guys do. They are angry that some guys interrupt with "not all men do that" and see it as an attack on the hardships that women have to put up with via their interactions with the male gender. It became a feminist meme and one that is actually pretty damaging to feminism. It really means pretty much what it says: all men do XYZ. It's sexism.

[noviapriani]

This argument has been made popular within the last year or so, and I haven't really done a lot of research into it this time around, but in the past when I saw this brought up, the data had ignored that men just tend to do jobs that are valued more by the market, and it wasn't necessarily an issue of sexism.

What I mean is that men do things like construction, crab fishing, trucking, plumbing, etc., things that women simply choose not to do. This can be because of social norms, but there's probably some biology to it, such as men generally being physically stronger than women and strength being something that's valuable when it comes to, say, lifting heavy shit? Fuck if I know. Anyway, women just don't do these jobs or go for them. Instead, they choose cushy office jobs, and many of them choose to be homemakers whereas fewer men choose cushy office jobs and being homemakers and teachers and shit.

So I'm wondering if this same counterargument applies today. When we talk about women making $0.77 for every $1 a man makes, is it for the same job? Does the study control for other variables?


Just to be clear, here, I completely agree that sexism is a very real problem in our culture, including the workplace. When women are assertive, they're called "bitchy" or "bossy" whereas men are "confident" or "possess leadership qualities" and so forth. I read about one study that showed biases in hiring managers, and even when they were made aware of their biases, they still fail to properly compensate for it. I agree that we live in a culture that blames rape victims for being raped. Etc. It's not much of a stretch for me to buy into this argument about how much women make vs how much men make. But I know that there have been problems with the argument in the past, and I wanna see someone back it up with real data.

I thought that statistic was long ago corrected to $0.95 for every $1 men earn. And I'm especially curious what this stat is for the millennial generation and beyond where women are graduating college at a significantly higher rate. Feminism is going to fuck over the next generation of men.

Here's the slightly deflating caveat: this reverse gender gap, as it's known, applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities. The rest of working women — even those of the same age, but who are married or don't live in a major metropolitan area — are still on the less scenic side of the wage divide.




IE women who are married are likely to quit, back off work, take time of for kids,. etc... and people in rural areas aren't getting degrees at the same rate.
http://content.time.com/time/busines...015274,00.html