Victory for feminism - The wage gap is closed

[MadImmortalMan]

There Is No Male-Female Wage Gap

A study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30 found that women earned 8% more than men.

By CARRIE LUKAS

Tuesday is Equal Pay Day—so dubbed by the National Committee for Pay Equity, which represents feminist groups including the National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority, the National Council of Women's Organizations and others. The day falls on April 12 because, according to feminist logic, women have to work that far into a calendar year before they earn what men already earned the year before.

In years past, feminist leaders marked the occasion by rallying outside the U.S. Capitol to decry the pernicious wage gap and call for government action to address systematic discrimination against women. This year will be relatively quiet. Perhaps feminists feel awkward protesting a liberal-dominated government—or perhaps they know that the recent economic downturn has exposed as ridiculous their claims that our economy is ruled by a sexist patriarchy.

The unemployment rate is consistently higher among men than among women. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 9.3% of men over the age of 16 are currently out of work. The figure for women is 8.3%. Unemployment fell for both sexes over the past year, but labor force participation (the percentage of working age people employed) also dropped. The participation rate fell more among men (to 70.4% today from 71.4% in March 2010) than women (to 58.3% from 58.8%). That means much of the improvement in unemployment numbers comes from discouraged workers—particularly male ones—giving up their job searches entirely.

Men have been hit harder by this recession because they tend to work in fields like construction, manufacturing and trucking, which are disproportionately affected by bad economic conditions. Women cluster in more insulated occupations, such as teaching, health care and service industries.

Yet if you can accept that the job choices of men and women lead to different unemployment rates, then you shouldn't be surprised by other differences—like differences in average pay.

Feminist hand-wringing about the wage gap relies on the assumption that the differences in average earnings stem from discrimination. Thus the mantra that women make only 77% of what men earn for equal work. But even a cursory review of the data proves this assumption false.

The Department of Labor's Time Use survey shows that full-time working women spend an average of 8.01 hours per day on the job, compared to 8.75 hours for full-time working men. One would expect that someone who works 9% more would also earn more. This one fact alone accounts for more than a third of the wage gap.

Choice of occupation also plays an important role in earnings. While feminists suggest that women are coerced into lower-paying job sectors, most women know that something else is often at work. Women gravitate toward jobs with fewer risks, more comfortable conditions, regular hours, more personal fulfillment and greater flexibility. Simply put, many women—not all, but enough to have a big impact on the statistics—are willing to trade higher pay for other desirable job characteristics.

Men, by contrast, often take on jobs that involve physical labor, outdoor work, overnight shifts and dangerous conditions (which is also why men suffer the overwhelming majority of injuries and deaths at the workplace). They put up with these unpleasant factors so that they can earn more.

Recent studies have shown that the wage gap shrinks—or even reverses—when relevant factors are taken into account and comparisons are made between men and women in similar circumstances. In a 2010 study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30, the research firm Reach Advisors found that women earned an average of 8% more than their male counterparts. Given that women are outpacing men in educational attainment, and that our economy is increasingly geared toward knowledge-based jobs, it makes sense that women's earnings are going up compared to men's.

Should we celebrate the closing of the wage gap? Certainly it's good news that women are increasingly productive workers, but women whose husbands and sons are out of work or under-employed are likely to have a different perspective. After all, many American women wish they could work less, and that they weren't the primary earners for their families.

Few Americans see the economy as a battle between the sexes. They want opportunity to abound so that men and women can find satisfying work situations that meet their unique needs. That—not a day dedicated to manufactured feminist grievances—would be something to celebrate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html



Yay!   

Now can I get a raise?

[Grey Fox]

I just got a raise, my gf still earns 17% more then me.

[Valmy]

This is one of the more ridiculous numbers that get tossed around anyway.  I was never even clear on what it represented.  I was told that women make less for doing the same jobs...but the number they quoted was wages based on similar education levels and not the same jobs...or whatever.  And I was never sure what government action was requested since it is already illegal to pay people different amounts based on gender.  Were the Feds supposed to make it really really really illegal or something?

[Admiral Yi]

Now can I get a raise?

Once you become a member of the patriarchy you can decide your own pay, along with everyone else's.

[Martinus]

This is one of the more ridiculous numbers that get tossed around anyway.  I was never even clear on what it represented.  I was told that women make less for doing the same jobs...but the number they quoted was wages based on similar education levels and not the same jobs...or whatever.  And I was never sure what government action was requested since it is already illegal to pay people different amounts based on gender.  Were the Feds supposed to make it really really really illegal or something?

We have been through this Nth times before so I won't bother this time.

[Valmy]

We have been through this Nth times before so I won't bother this time.

Did you post this just to say 'fuck you' then? 

[HVC]

This is one of the more ridiculous numbers that get tossed around anyway.  I was never even clear on what it represented.  I was told that women make less for doing the same jobs...but the number they quoted was wages based on similar education levels and not the same jobs...or whatever.  And I was never sure what government action was requested since it is already illegal to pay people different amounts based on gender.  Were the Feds supposed to make it really really really illegal or something?

How dare nurses not make the same as doctors! they do the same job!

Oh well, yay for equality i suppose. somewhere out there there's a female accountant making as shit a pay as i do

[Martinus]

We have been through this Nth times before so I won't bother this time.

Did you post this just to say 'fuck you' then?

Nah, but I am annoyed when people (read: men) come up with that argument. The gender equality is an illusion unless it takes into account (and embraces) different work styles (including those necessitated by parenthood) between genders. As long as a woman has to give up being a mother in order to enjoy being paid "equally" and have a career (whereas the guy who wants to be a father can do so easily), then there is no real pay equality.

[derspiess]

This is one of the more ridiculous numbers that get tossed around anyway.  I was never even clear on what it represented.  I was told that women make less for doing the same jobs...but the number they quoted was wages based on similar education levels and not the same jobs...or whatever.  And I was never sure what government action was requested since it is already illegal to pay people different amounts based on gender.  Were the Feds supposed to make it really really really illegal or something?

When I worked for a credit card bank, we had a highly-paid marketing consultant come in & brief us on economic trends, demographics, etc.  Most of it was stuff we already knew, which was bad enough given what we were paying her. 

But about 3/4 the way through the presentation she threw up a slide showing disparity in terms of raw income between men & women, not offering up any details as to how each figure breaks down into income/time worked or how male & female salaries compare for similar jobs.  Now she could have used that to illustrate a valid point about differences in purchasing power, but no-- she decided to get on her soapbox & preach about how "women are still making less money for the same work."  I challenged her to show some actual detailed data to support her claim but she dodged it by saying she was running short on time & had to rush through the rest of the presentation.

We never hired her again, thank God.

[Barrister]

We have been through this Nth times before so I won't bother this time.

Did you post this just to say 'fuck you' then?

Nah, but I am annoyed when people (read: men) come up with that argument. The gender equality is an illusion unless it takes into account (and embraces) different work styles (including those necessitated by parenthood) between genders. As long as a woman has to give up being a mother in order to enjoy being paid "equally" and have a career (whereas the guy who wants to be a father can do so easily), then there is no real pay equality.

What part of being a father and a career man is easy? 

[Valmy]

Nah, but I am annoyed when people (read: men) come up with that argument. The gender equality is an illusion unless it takes into account (and embraces) different work styles (including those necessitated by parenthood) between genders. As long as a woman has to give up being a mother in order to enjoy being paid "equally" and have a career (whereas the guy who wants to be a father can do so easily), then there is no real pay equality.

The arguement is I just do not understand the facts and the more I look into it the more confusing it gets.  For every 'women get paid less for the same work' thing I see I see 'men are collapsing!  Women are taking over!  OH EM GEEE' or 'Women attench college far more than men' or whatever.

So what is the truth?  Is this a serious problem or is it already solving itself?  I have no idea and the data seems like it is misrepresented by people with an agenda one way or the other.

I understand tackling the issue of parenthood/career path and how biology is a bitch to women in this regard.  But that is an entirely different point than 'Women have to work harder to make the same amount' 'women get paid less to do the same job'.  That sounds like active discrimination from employers rather than maternity leave and so forth slowing career advancement.

[Martinus]

It's about a work style. The system is made for a "man's lifestyle" (preferably a single/gay man who "works hard and plays hard") and not for that of a working mother, for example. Not that I am complaining, being a beneficiary of the system, but that's the problem - if you structure the system in a way that a woman wishing to be a mother has to sacrifice her career to do so, then the argument that she can "work as hard as a man for the same pay" becomes illusory.

Most Western European societies recognize that already.

[Valmy]

It's about a work style. The system is made for a "man's lifestyle" (preferably a single/gay man who "works hard and plays hard") and not for that of a working mother, for example. Not that I am complaining, being a beneficiary of the system, but that's the problem - if you structure the system in a way that a woman wishing to be a mother has to sacrifice her career to do so, then the argument that she can "work as hard as a man for the same pay" becomes illusory.

Most Western European societies recognize that already.

Is there any particular thing these European societies are doing the rest of the world should take heed of?

[The Brain]

This is one of the more ridiculous numbers that get tossed around anyway.  I was never even clear on what it represented.  I was told that women make less for doing the same jobs...but the number they quoted was wages based on similar education levels and not the same jobs...or whatever.  And I was never sure what government action was requested since it is already illegal to pay people different amounts based on gender.  Were the Feds supposed to make it really really really illegal or something?

Why do you hate women? Besides the obvious I mean.

[HVC]

Nah, but I am annoyed when people (read: men) come up with that argument. The gender equality is an illusion unless it takes into account (and embraces) different work styles (including those necessitated by parenthood) between genders. As long as a woman has to give up being a mother in order to enjoy being paid "equally" and have a career (whereas the guy who wants to be a father can do so easily), then there is no real pay equality.

So you'd be fine with a female college of your working less hours but making more per hour to compensate? What if she wasn't a mother but still made more per hour to cover the possibility that she may become a mother in the future?

In nearly every field people with more education, more experience and more hours put in get better positions and better paid. Why should ones gender factor into it? Should people from poorer backgrounds make more to compensate for the fact that they couldn't get a better education to get a better job?