Why do some women think there is a wage gap?

Post Reply New Topic

You are making an assumption that their motive has nothing to do with their concern for life of the fetus but rather with the fact that being pregnant would "keep woman at home". Just because you disagree with people that doesn't give you a right to simply assume that their motive is the most ridiculous imaginable.

Also keep in mind that in India the relation between abortion and gender issues is the opposite. Over there, due to sexism, they like to abort female fetuses. And in order to address this issue they said doctors aren't allowed to tell the gender of the fetus to the parents in order for female fetus not to be aborted.

So if you think that anti-abortionists don't care about fetuses and only care about discriminating women, then you would think that in India they would all become pro-abortionist, right?

Well, in my case my sole concern is the life of the fetus. As far as gender I am all for womans rights, but the issue of preserving life overweights it.

So I guess the "valid" statement would not be "they are trying to deny women their rights" but rather "they don't rate womans rights as highly as fetus right". That second thing is correct. But even then that doesn't necesserely mean its because they regard womens rights as less important. It could mean because they regard fetus right as more important.



Once again you are making an assumption that Hillary being a woman was their sole reason. Most of them also voted for Trump on the second election, and Biden was a man.

Now, the fact that Biden won and Hillary didn't, indicates that there might have been *small proportion* of people who voted for Trump on first election and then voted for Biden on second election, all because Hillary was a woman and Biden was a man. But in this case we aren't talking about the vast majority of Trump voters, we are talking about their small proportion. Its just that small proportion is often enough to tip the election results.

Now, one thing about Trump voters that "would be" more sexist is them overlooking "grab them by the puzzy" comments. Well, all I can say is that I, personally, was strongly considering voting for Hillary when I heard those comments. And probably would have, if the election were to happen then and there. But since I had a month until an election to cool down, thats why I still voted for Trump due to the other issues. One reason I voted for Trump is that I read online Hillary would start a war with Russia. I didn't know if thats the case, but I didn't want to live in fear.



I have no idea what Squad is, thats the first time I hear it. So I can't comment much.

But by looking just at your own words, you mixed in lots of demographic factors. So how do you even know its about gender rather than race or religion? Let alone the actual things they "do" (which again I can't say much, cause I don't know).



That begs the question of OP. I thought this is what we were trying to figure out on the first place?



I don't believe that. I kept trying to persuade my past girlfriends to go to college and earn degrees back when I was dating them. In fact this was often one of the biggest conflicts we were having, when I kept trying to persuade them to get degrees and they didn't want to.

That doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't want them to get abortion (not that this ever came up). So its not as simple as you think.

While the pay scales are the same for men and women (based on actual hours worked), women's take-home wages are somewhere around 70% of men's take-home wages (for reasons I stated previously).

The OP seems to assume that wage pay scales are the same as take-home wages.

I didn't know he asked this question before, I wasn't watching his threads.

Its still a bit odd that he isn't trying to "argue his position against it" but rather just asks it in a question form.

Not in it's own thread, but here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=401262&p=8900059&#p8900036

Pointing to offered wages in job postings not specifying gender demonstrates a failure to understand what the concept actually refers to. Of course if one re-defines the concept to mean something else they can make an argument that holds water in that context but it doesn't mean the argument is valid or relevant to what the concept actually means.

Here's a page describing the concept and how Ontario is doing in regards to it: https://www.payequity.gov.on.ca/en/Lear ... fault.aspx

Its not about "redefining the concept". Rather it is the fact that this is what it sounds like to a naive listener when one hears those words. Now, the fact that in that form this doesn't make much sense is a good reason to suspect it refers to something other than that. But that isn't enough to really know "what" that would be. So it is only natural to ask a question and hope to get an answer.

Thank you for giving those links. I will read them and see what it is I was unaware of.

@QFT:

The Squad is the following members of congress:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Hispanic female
Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Somali Muslim female
Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), white Muslim female
Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), black female
Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), black male
Cori Bush (D-MO), black female

They all espouse left-wing political views. AOC, Bush and Tlaib are members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

The right's criticism, and thus, hatred of them is based on sexism (except for Bowman), racism (all of them, although Tlaib is white), and Islamophobia (Omar and Tlaib). All of them except Omar were born in the U.S., but even then, Trump said they should "fix their countries of origin and go back to where they came from".

Before you post something like this, you can just Google "Wage gap men women" and see what you get. You might avoid seeming out of touch....

Okay lets make it simpler. Consider a hypothetical situation that there is a black woman who is being disliked. You are saying it is "both racism and sexism". But how do you know it is both rather than one of the two? Maybe someone is racist but not sexist, so they only hate her because she is black while her being a woman plays no role. Or maybe the opposite: someone is sexist but not racist. So they are prejudiced against her on a basis of gender, but race plays no role. Well with squad people it is even more complicated since you threw a bunch of stuff into a mix. So you can't really "know" which one it is unless it is being made clear.



Well, then specifically in case of Trump its racism but there is no evidence for sexism.

In case of someone else it might be the opposite who knows. But you can't just assume it unless you see it.

It's not that I am denying it, it's just I cannnot find any proof of it, especially when people I know are in professions where the pay is the same for either gender.

You are likely assuming that written wage policies are the same as actual wages earned.

Obviously, they are NOT the same.

Because there is.

There are numerous studies that look at this on a larger scale. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... gap-facts/

but you choose to ignore it because of anecdotal evidence (i.e. signs you see on doors).

Women will catch up, eventually. I can't say when, though. But it is inevitable.

Sorry I am just understanding that. Could you elaborate? The women I know were given the wages they were told they would be getting when I asked them about this, if that's what you mean?

Do you really have to have it spelled out for you?

For example: A written wage policy may state that a "Tech III" position is worth "$21.37 to $37.21 per hour".  After 12 years, a male "Tech III" may be earning the full $37.21 per hour wage, while a female "Tech III" may only be earning $26.05; the female's wages are 70% of the male's wages, due to the factors I mentioned earlier.

If you do not understand it by now, you likely never will.

Oh okay I see. How do people know that this is an actual wage gap policy though, and not just personal preference of an employer rather than a policy?

There is no "Wage Gap Policy"!

There is only the reality of wage gaps.

You just do not get it, do you?