Should women earn as much as men? Watch

Malsy
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#261
Report 10 years ago
#261
Yes. We are living in the 21st century and women and men should be equal now.
0
reply
emilyyy
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#262
Report 10 years ago
#262
(Original post by Bornstubborn)
Not only do the women get paid the same to do less, they also bring in a lot less viewers and stillg et the same pay.

Wimbledon is a great analogy for the workplace. Women want the same money to do less in a less riskier work place while travelling shorter distance's to get there.
What I just posted applies to this too.

Your article states that on average men are getting paid more than women - because there are more men are employed in the higher-paid, risky jobs that you like to natter on about. In essence all it is saying is that risky jobs are higher paid, and the people in them generally get paid more than people that sit in an office all day.
No-one is arguing against that.

The argument comes in when you suggest that men should be higher paid than women, even if they are in the same job with the same productivity.
What don't you understand about that?

EDIT// And your Wimbedon analogy is probably the worst I've ever heard for the workplace.
Women don't want to be paid more for doing less work.
Women want to be paid the same for doing the same work.
0
reply
WithFlyingColours
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#263
Report 10 years ago
#263
The argument that people are making is when we consider a man and a woman in the same job, doing the same hours, and performing with the same productivity. In this instance men and women should be paid the same.
You're correct in what you say.

In this instance men and women do get paid the same. When you apply for a job do you not see an advertised wage? People have only deduced from the higher average earnings that men get, that there is some sort of wage difference between men and women doing the same job ceteris paribus.
0
reply
Bornstubborn
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#264
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#264
When Wimbledon brought in the same prize money for men and women this year, the aim was equality between the sexes.

But the result is that the ladies are coming out on top.

They are actually being paid almost twice as much as their male counterparts for each game played at the championships this year, Daily Mail research suggests.

In the first round, female players received an average of £481.93 a game - compared with only £284.70 for men.

The pay gap arises because women play the best of three sets, while the men play best of five.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-set-cash.html
0
reply
Bornstubborn
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#265
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#265
(Original post by emilyyy)
What I just posted applies to this too.

Your article states that on average men are getting paid more than women - because there are more men are employed in the higher-paid, risky jobs that you like to natter on about. In essence all it is saying is that risky jobs are higher paid, and the people in them generally get paid more than people that sit in an office all day.
No-one is arguing against that.

The argument comes in when you suggest that men should be higher paid than women, even if they are in the same job with the same productivity.
What don't you understand about that?

EDIT// And your Wimbedon analogy is probably the worst I've ever heard for the workplace.
Women don't want to be paid more for doing less work.
Women want to be paid the same for doing the same work.
I don't think i have suggested men should get more if everything remains equal. I believe in some jobs women actually make more than men for doing the same job like for like.

However it is clear that the goal of the feminists is to get women 'equal' pay regardless of education, jobs, hours, maternity leave, risk, tavel etc

I have to disagree with this and this is clearly not true eqaulity.
0
reply
Lychee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#266
Report 10 years ago
#266
But the thing with wimbledon is that men decide that women play fewer sets and don't allow them to play more. Whilst I do take on board the comments about viewers it is perhaps also true that the men's matches are promoted more than the womens. It is also related to the nationality of the players i think. If this hotshot 14 year old that won the juniors does well in the Ladies in the future then more brits will watch the womens games.

Women do risky and diry jobs too and dont get paid that well for them. Part of the problem is not women getting paid less for exactly the same job but getting paid less for comparable jobs. For example if you consider nursing, primarily a female career then a just qualified nurse (who has spent 3 years at uni) would start at around £20,000. In comparison a PC (male job) which requires no training would start on £21,000 and this would rise to £24,000 at the completion of initial training. Nursing and policing are both vital, dangerous and messy jobs are usually considered to be fairly equal in terms of standing. In addition Nursing needs more training. A police man with any degree could enter on teh police graduate trainig scheme and earn considerably more. These are the sort of raeas where the pay gap should be looked at.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#267
Report 10 years ago
#267
(Original post by emilyyy)
Elipsis, are you somewhat confused as to what people are arguing here?

The inital article in discussion stated that men, on average, were being paid more than women. This did not take into account what type of job was being done, or what environment it was being done in. Statistically there are more men in higher-risk, longer-hour jobs, which, because of those facts, have a greater wage on average, than other jobs.
Since there are more men enjoyed in those jobs than women, and fewer men in lower-paid jobs (just as a national average), it makes sense that the men, on average, are therefore paid higher than women.
But it must be stressed that this is because of the job they typically do, not their gender.

The argument that people are making is when we consider a man and a woman in the same job, doing the same hours, and performing with the same productivity. In this instance men and women should be paid the same.

I don't really get what is being debated; it seems very clear-cut to me.
Err, you essentially just regurgetated my argument. It was other people whining on about the pay gap which lead the discussion to this point.
0
reply
emilyyy
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#268
Report 10 years ago
#268
(Original post by WithFlyingColours)
You're correct in what you say.

In this instance men and women do get paid the same. When you apply for a job do you not see an advertised wage? People have only deduced from the higher average earnings that men get, that there is some sort of wage difference between men and women doing the same job ceteris paribus.
That's where I'd disagree with you. Ignoring averages (because they can be ridiculously misleading) there are instances arising where women in the same job as a man, and performing to the same standard, are getting paid less. This is the issue that needs to be addressed - however due to social stigmata I don't feel that the issue will be resolved for a good while, if at all.

Other than that I don't see what people are arguing about!

And
(Original post by Bornstubborn)
However it is clear that the goal of the feminists is to get women 'equal' pay regardless of education, jobs, hours, maternity leave, risk, tavel etc
I really don't think that's their goal at all - feminists might be intent on reaching equality, but they're not stupid. They do understand that there will be wage differences between different jobs, and different hours.
They're searching for only equal salaries in the same job, with the same performance.

Let's leave the maternity leave thing out of this, shall we. In my opinion it has very little to do with what we're discussing.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#269
Report 10 years ago
#269
(Original post by Lychee)
But the thing with wimbledon is that men decide that women play fewer sets and don't allow them to play more. Whilst I do take on board the comments about viewers it is perhaps also true that the men's matches are promoted more than the womens. It is also related to the nationality of the players i think. If this hotshot 14 year old that won the juniors does well in the Ladies in the future then more brits will watch the womens games.

Women do risky and diry jobs too and dont get paid that well for them. Part of the problem is not women getting paid less for exactly the same job but getting paid less for comparable jobs. For example if you consider nursing, primarily a female career then a just qualified nurse (who has spent 3 years at uni) would start at around £20,000. In comparison a PC (male job) which requires no training would start on £21,000 and this would rise to £24,000 at the completion of initial training. Nursing and policing are both vital, dangerous and messy jobs are usually considered to be fairly equal in terms of standing. In addition Nursing needs more training. A police man with any degree could enter on teh police graduate trainig scheme and earn considerably more. These are the sort of raeas where the pay gap should be looked at.
Nursing is in no way as dangerous as being a police officer. There's no point in cross referencing the two jobs because a woman can just as easily be in a PCO job as a man, if not easier because they lower the requirements for them so that more join. More people watch the mens games because they are better, faster and more skillful. It's like womens football.
0
reply
emilyyy
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#270
Report 10 years ago
#270
(Original post by Elipsis)
Err, you essentially just regurgetated my argument. It was other people whining on about the pay gap which lead the discussion to this point.
Oh, right. Sorry about that then.
After countless pages of the same argument being thrown around, and many sweeping generalisations being made, I must say I found it rather difficult to understand where you were coming from.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#271
Report 10 years ago
#271
(Original post by emilyyy)
Oh, right. Sorry about that then.
After countless pages of the same argument being thrown around, and many sweeping generalisations being made, I must say I found it rather difficult to understand where you were coming from.
I just think equality has largely been achieved. If women want to push up their averages then they can go into maths/science related subjects, because as it stands they account for 60% of arts degrees and only around 15% of scientific degrees.
0
reply
Bornstubborn
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#272
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#272
(Original post by emilyyy)


I really don't think that's their goal at all - feminists might be intent on reaching equality, but they're not stupid. They do understand that there will be wage differences between different jobs, and different hours.
They're searching for only equal salaries in the same job, with the same performance.

Let's leave the maternity leave thing out of this, shall we. In my opinion it has very little to do with what we're discussing.
I think its the clear goal of feminists to get women to out earn men. If these feminists care so much about eqaulity why do they brag with so much glee and happyness about young girls out performing boys at GCSE and A levels. I think they are trying to say women are better than men.

I think maternity is an issue, a man is more competitive if he wont be taking amternity leave. Very simple.

It doesn't really matter, if the government intervenes by making women earn more for doing less and this negatively effects the wages of men in this country we will see a lot more educated/skilled men emigrating. Then the government will suddenly have a change of heart and things will go back to how they were.
0
reply
ThePenguinMafia
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#273
Report 10 years ago
#273
(Original post by Malinski)
Everyone should be paid according to how much they do, regardless of gender!
QFT

Equality is more complicated than a lot of people are making it out to be though.
0
reply
Lychee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#274
Report 10 years ago
#274
Nursing is in no way as dangerous as being a police officer. There's no point in cross referencing the two jobs because a woman can just as easily be in a PCO job as a man
Obviously there are differnces between the two jobs but danger is only one factor in higher/lower pay. It is certinally arguable that nurses have other responsibilities and face other factors that equal the danger factor of the police force. Danger is obviously not the only relevant factor- if it was then Police would be paid more than doctors and investment bankers which they are not. What is relevant is the benefit to societly of the job they do. Something that I would argue is about equal (as far as these things can be).

Also obviously regardless of gender nurses get paid teh same as nurses and police get paid the same as police. What I am arguing is that certain jobs that are traditionally considered to be female are considered less valuable and are less well paid than certain 'male' jobs. This is not deliberate on anyones part but it seems to be a hangover from earlier times when womens jobs were seen as less important and not as proper careers. If inequalities like this were addressed then the pay gap would get smaller.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#275
Report 10 years ago
#275
(Original post by Lychee)
Obviously there are differnces between the two jobs but danger is only one factor in higher/lower pay. It is certinally arguable that nurses have other responsibilities and face other factors that equal the danger factor of the police force. Danger is obviously not the only relevant factor- if it was then Police would be paid more than doctors and investment bankers which they are not. What is relevant is the benefit to societly of the job they do. Something that I would argue is about equal (as far as these things can be).

Also obviously regardless of gender nurses get paid teh same as nurses and police get paid the same as police. What I am arguing is that certain jobs that are traditionally considered to be female are considered less valuable and are less well paid than certain 'male' jobs. This is not deliberate on anyones part but it seems to be a hangover from earlier times when womens jobs were seen as less important and not as proper careers. If inequalities like this were addressed then the pay gap would get smaller.
Actually, the nurses lower pay reflects the fact that their unions are extremely poor at negotiating on their behalf. The fact women choose lower paying jobs when they could go for higher paying jobs just proves my point that women are selecting lower paid jobs because they want to do them for whatever reasons.
0
reply
Malinski
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#276
Report 10 years ago
#276
(Original post by ThePenguinMafia)
QFT

Equality is more complicated than a lot of people are making it out to be though.
What does QFT stand for?
0
reply
Davetherave
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#277
Report 10 years ago
#277
only hot ones
0
reply
Jelkin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#278
Report 10 years ago
#278
(Original post by Bornstubborn)
I think its the clear goal of feminists to get women to out earn men. If these feminists care so much about eqaulity why do they brag with so much glee and happyness about young girls out performing boys at GCSE and A levels. I think they are trying to say women are better than men.
Perhaps they point it out to suggest that women are not any less capable than men? And what feminists have you met that think women should out-earn men? I think you've come up with these prejudices all by yourself.
0
reply
WithFlyingColours
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#279
Report 10 years ago
#279
If these feminists care so much about eqaulity why do they brag with so much glee and happyness about young girls out performing boys at GCSE and A levels. I think they are trying to say women are better than men.
It's common knowledge that our education system is feminised. As a boy I can honestly say that the only teachers who have ever truly inspired me (apart from one language teacher) have all been men. New teachers are in the ratio of 7:1 in the favour of women. Coursework has been proven to suit girls better, as has the modular system at A level.
0
reply
Bornstubborn
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#280
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#280
(Original post by WithFlyingColours)
It's common knowledge that our education system is feminised. As a boy I can honestly say that the only teachers who have ever truly inspired me (apart from one language teacher) have all been men. New teachers are in the ratio of 7:1 in the favour of women. Coursework has been proven to suit girls better, as has the modular system at A level.
That is so true, the education system is dominated by women teachers and it definetly fails lots of boys. Women teachers just can't discipline and inspire boys to study well and behave correctly.

When i was younger i was let down by the education system and then the *******s had the cheek to say i was lucky to get such good grade's (they weren't even that great).

The best teacher i ever had was my dad (a former maths teacher), he really had a no nonsense approach to studying.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (314)
37.74%
No - but I will (64)
7.69%
No - I don't want to (62)
7.45%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (392)
47.12%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed