Victory for feminism - The wage gap is closed

[MadImmortalMan]

So, would taking some time off for kid things but making the same amount of money for the time worked not qualify as equal? Hmm that sentence is awkward...Say the guy works 40 hours and makes $1000. The girl works 20 hours and spends the rest with the kids and makes $500. That's equal, right?

[The Brain]

I wouldn't be surprised if women are less aggressive than men when negotiating their salary.

[Valmy]

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

Their horrible fashion sense mostly.

[HVC]

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

Their horrible fashion sense mostly.

It's gay guys who make them dress that way

[MadImmortalMan]

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

We gave them the vote, and what's the first thing they did with it? Passed prohibition. 

[Martinus]

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 hourse 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 feild 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?

Why? Because as a society we need to support mothers, and supporting working mothers makes sure not just conservative "woman's place is in the kitchen" rightwinger types are able to breed.

[derspiess]

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.

So then what's the $ value on getting to be a mother, so we can know how much more to pay women who don't become mothers to compensate them on what they're missing out on? 

[derspiess]

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.

So then where is your rant about straight men with families being underpaid when compared to gay men?

Most Western European societies recognize that already.

If society wants to make some sort of allowance (paid maternity leave, etc.) for women to take time off & have babies, that's okay with me.  Same for other benefits women typically get in western societies (better healthcare, less hazardous jobs, longer life expectancy).  But if we're going to do those things, we need to stop obsessing about 'issues' such as women appearing to have fewer career opportunities than men, Title IX, etc.

[Admiral Yi]

If society wants to make some sort of allowance (paid maternity leave, etc.) for women to take time off & have babies, that's okay with me.  Same for other benefits women typically get in western societies (better healthcare, less hazardous jobs, longer life expectancy).  But if we're going to do those things, we need to stop obsessing about 'issues' such as women appearing to have fewer career opportunities than men, Title IX, etc.

If society feels the need to do that, the costs should be imposed societally, not on the employer.

[Caliga]

We gave them the vote, and what's the first thing they did with it? Passed prohibition. 

The second thing they did was elect Warren Harding.

[Slargos]

I'm curious why a woman who takes more sick days than me and works less hours than me somehow "deserves" the same pay?

I'm all for equal pay for equal effort, but that never seems to be the salient point.

Usually it's "equal pay for equal position" and affirmative action for the plush positions.

I never, ever heard any feminist organization demand to be given more positions as plumbers, lumberjacks or mill workers. It's all board rooms and lawyering.

[Slargos]

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 hourse 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 feild 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?

Why? Because as a society we need to support mothers, and supporting working mothers makes sure not just conservative "woman's place is in the kitchen" rightwinger types are able to breed.

Holy shit, you're all over the place. Have you ever held a consistent position in your entire life, you queer father fucker? 

[MadImmortalMan]

We gave them the vote, and what's the first thing they did with it? Passed prohibition. 

The second thing they did was elect Warren Harding.

Hey don't diss the hometown boy. I don't go shitting all over your Hatfields and McCoys.   

[Caliga]

I met a McCoy the other week at the state fairgrounds.  She was trying to sell some cookbook of Appalachian heritage cooking she wrote.  I didn't buy the cookbook, but I enjoyed her free samples of beer cheese.

[HVC]

Why? Because as a society we need to support mothers, and supporting working mothers makes sure not just conservative "woman's place is in the kitchen" rightwinger types are able to breed.

There's maternity leave to ensure that mothers can take time off for the baby (although i think the US version is like insanely short), tax benefits for parents, and more and more state funded day care services. I'm all for directed support of families, and I'd support more. however paying someone a different rate for different work and different effort because of their genitalia? That doesn't seem equal or right to me.

Also, you didn't answer my question . Perhaps it's the languish stereotype of you clouding my judgment, but if a female lawyer (or worse, a legal assistant) made as much as you because she had a kid and "was in the same field" as you I think you'd be screaming bloody murder about breeders