Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    no, my a level sociology class wasn't wrong

    the 22.6 per cent figure in the national statistics is a different one from the one they gave me (it's a more recent one) and they might not have taken similarity between jobs into account. Furthermore, the 22.6 per cent figure just proves that the pay gap between men and women has been increasing.

    and thanks for the neg rep, whoever gave it to me. coward for not leaving your name.
    Why don't you show us where this figure comes from with evidence? Further to that, prove to us women are doing the same week, cus it seems to be that a womans working week is something entirely different. Indeed, full time for a woman is on average 41 hours, and 44 hours for men.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    no, my a level sociology class wasn't wrong

    the 22.6 per cent figure in the national statistics is a different one from the one they gave me and they might not have taken similarity between jobs into account.
    Fine, in that case cite the source used in your sociology class.

    For women to earn on average 22% less in the same job working the same hours as men, then women would have to occupy vastly more of the higher-end jobs in business to reduce this figure to the actual overall full-time pay gap of 12.2%

    Do you see vastly more women occupying managerial and board positions in companies? It's not something I've seen.

    Edit: I see you now saying that the figure from your A-level sociology was more out of date. Well national statistics tracks back to 1997 and the gap's never been above ~17.5% for full-time in that timeframe. Your class would probably have had to draw statistics from the 1980's to arrive at 22.6%
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seven_Three)
    I can't believe he actually needs this explained to him. There isn't enough face palm in the world.
    You don't get my point. My original statistic of 22 per cent didn't come from the daily mail, i just googled it afterwards.

    :sigh:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TShadow383)
    Fine, in that case cite the source used in your sociology class.

    For women to earn on average 22% less in the same job working the same hours as men, then women would have to occupy vastly more of the higher-end jobs in business to reduce this figure to the actual overall full-time pay gap of 12.2%

    Do you see vastly more women occupying managerial and board positions in companies? It's not something I've seen.
    all these statistics are giving me a headache.

    either way, there is still a significant pay gap between men and women, that you cannot deny.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TShadow383)
    Fine, in that case cite the source used in your sociology class.

    For women to earn on average 22% less in the same job working the same hours as men, then women would have to occupy vastly more of the higher-end jobs in business to reduce this figure to the actual overall full-time pay gap of 12.2%

    Do you see vastly more women occupying managerial and board positions in companies? It's not something I've seen.
    If I could reduce my out goings on pay by 22% by hiring women, then I would do it, wouldn't you? O, I forgot, all the businessmen in the world met up last week, and we came to an agreement that we would all pay women less for the same work. It's a conspiracy I tell you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by devotchka_)
    That isn't necessarily true, actually. There are a certain set of codes and 'rules' that are generally upheld. But then again, I suppose it depends if you're of the opinion that the masses hold all the power in today's society, or the elite hold the power. I'm of the latter opinion, rather Marxist I suppose. That's the whole point of transgression and the reason it exists. These only tend to change if a MASSIVE amount of people are in uproar about them.

    In the last part, you seem to want me to say that those rules are fine, and paint me as one of those scary feminists. But no, I think women should face the same standards as men and vice-versa.

    No i wasn't trying to paint you as anything merely trying to see if you were like other so called feminists who like double standards when it goes in their favour.

    However with things like the army most girls would argue that it disadvantages women because they are not as physically capable naturally and are therefore fighting an uphill battle. nice to see your for proper equality and not for policies advantaging females.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/m...er/8455161.stm
    This is why feminism is needed.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Why don't you show us where this figure comes from with evidence? Further to that, prove to us women are doing the same week, cus it seems to be that a womans working week is something entirely different. Indeed, full time for a woman is on average 41 hours, and 44 hours for men.
    oh shut up, seriously. :yawn: just swallow your pride and admit that there IS a significant pay gap between men and women, whichever way you look at it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    all these statistics are giving me a headache.

    either way, there is still a significant pay gap between men and women, that you cannot deny.
    12.2% is fairly significant - but I've explained what I think are the reasons behind it - I don't believe for one second that sexism is the primary cause.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciawhobat)
    So why, for example, must we strive to have equal numbers of cocks and vaginas in certain kinds of jobs, or whatever else? Why does it matter if there are more penised post graduated? And so on.
    If that's the only difference between men and women then why are you even considering them as important groupings from which we must have equal representation?

    It's as meaningful as ensuring an even distribution of hair and eye colours (to take your example from earlier).
    The reason no one is trying to encourage more gingers into academia - for example - is because there is no disparity in the ratio of intelligent gingers and gingers in academia. Ginger people have never been barred from academia. Ginger people have never been told they are of lower intelligence for being ginger. There is, however, a disparity between the numbers of intelligent women/black people/working class people and the numbers of women/black people/working class people in academia. Women, blacks and poor people have in the past been banned form higher education and told they are of lower intelligence - they still are told they are of lower intelligence. There is also no pay difference between gingers and non-gingers, but there is a pay difference - that cannot be fully explained away by hours worked - between men and women doing the same job.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    all these statistics are giving me a headache.

    either way, there is still a significant pay gap between men and women, that you cannot deny.
    But it's due to the choices women make, like working fewer hours, studying social sciences, take low paying jobs, get children. It's not due to discrimination, because then why don't companies hire women because they are cheaper.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Libtolu)
    No i wasn't trying to paint you as anything merely trying to see if you were like other so called feminists who like double standards when it goes in their favour.

    However with things like the army most girls would argue that it disadvantages women because they are not as physically capable naturally and are therefore fighting an uphill battle. nice to see your for proper equality and not for policies advantaging females.
    policies advantaging females were needed at the time when feminism emerged, why is that so difficult to understand?

    The real issue is the prevalence of male power in this society, not a few cases of the contrary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Are all girls in Newport as open to sexism as you are?

    :ahee:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Camlon)
    But it's due to the choices women make, like working fewer hours, studying social sciences, take low paying jobs, get children. It's not due to discrimination, because then why don't companies hire women because they are cheaper.
    yes, and the choices women make are due to socialisation into low-paid jobs which are inferior in status, as I have said 50 times already.

    if all women were employed because they were cheaper and all men unemployed, it would cause chaos in the economy. If that doesnt make sense to you, then I'm not going to bother to explain it further.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    oh shut up, seriously. just swallow your pride and admit that there IS a significant pay gap between men and women, whichever way you look at it.
    I don't deny there is. I deny your reasons as to why there is. According to you every business man and woman in the world colluded together to pay women less. Even though we live in a free market economy, where supply and demand dictate the value of everything from a loaf of bread to an hour of someones time. If one employer was paying his female employees 22% less for doing the same job, another employer would poach them and pay them 10% less, and before you know it they would be paid the same as men.

    Here is a more extensive list of reasons why women earn learn for you to ponder:
    • Men go into technology and hard sciences more than women.
    • Men are more likely to take hazardous jobs than women, and such jobs pay more than cushier and safer jobs.
    • Men are more willing to expose themselves to inclement weather at work, and are compensated for it ("compensating differences" in the language of economics).
    • Men tend to take more stressful jobs that are not "nine-to-five."
    • Many women prefer personal fulfillment at work (child care professional, for example) to higher pay.
    • Men are bigger risk takers than women, in general. Higher risk leads to higher reward.
    • The worst working hours pay more, and men are more likely to work these hours than women.
    • Dangerous jobs (coal mining) pay more and are more male dominated.
    • Men tend to "update" their work qualifications more than women do.
    • Men are more likely to work longer hours, and the pay gap widens for every hour past 40 per week.
    • Women are more likely to have "gaps" in their careers, primarily because of child rearing and child care. Less experience means lower pay.
    • Women are nine times more likely than men to drop out of work for "family reasons." Less seniority leads to lower pay.
    • Men work more weeks per year than women.
    • Men have half the absenteeism rate of women.
    • Men are more willing to commute long distances to work.
    • Men are more willing to relocate to undesirable locations for higher-paying jobs.
    • Men are more willing to take jobs that require extensive travel.
    • In the corporate world men are more likely to choose higher-paying fields such as finance and sales, whereas women are more prevalent in lower-paying fields such as human resources and public relations.
    • When men and women have the same job title, male responsibilities tend to be greater.
    • Men are more likely to work by commission; women are more likely to seek job security. The former has more earning potential.
    • Women place greater value on flexibility, a humane work environment, and having time for children and family than men do.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by O-Ren)
    The reason no one is trying to encourage more gingers into academia - for example - is because there is no disparity in the ratio of intelligent gingers and gingers in academia. Ginger people have never been barred from academia. Ginger people have never been told they are of lower intelligence for being ginger. There is, however, a disparity between the numbers of intelligent women/black people/working class people and the numbers of women/black people/working class people in academia. Women, blacks and poor people have in the past been banned form higher education and told they are of lower intelligence. There is also no pay difference between gingers and non-gingers, but there is a pay difference - that cannot be fully explained away by hours worked - between men and women doing the same job.
    No, but it can be explained by the whole myriad of ways female employees are worth less to employers.
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo160.html
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TShadow383)
    12.2% is fairly significant - but I've explained what I think are the reasons behind it - I don't believe for one second that sexism is the primary cause.
    what you believe causes the pay gap is very different from reality.

    Countless sociologists have argued it is due to sexism: Oakley, Greer, Giddens, Marxists to name a few. And they all know far more about the matter than you do.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    yes, and the choices women make are due to socialisation into low-paid jobs which are inferior in status, as I have said 50 times already.

    if all women were employed because they were cheaper and all men unemployed, it would cause chaos in the economy. If that doesnt make sense to you, then I'm not going to bother to explain it further.
    It's nothing to do with socialisation. Men and women have entirely different brains, which is shown by various medical and surgical studies performed over the last 50+ years. Men have better spacial awareness, and are naturally better at maths - things that are worth more in society. Women have higher emotional IQs and estrogen, which pushes them into careing positions in our society, which tend to pay less, or in the case of mothering nothing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by O-Ren)
    The reason no one is trying to encourage more gingers into academia - for example - is because there is no disparity in the ratio of intelligent gingers and gingers in academia. Ginger people have never been barred from academia. Ginger people have never been told they are of lower intelligence for being ginger. There is, however, a disparity between the numbers of intelligent women/black people/working class people and the numbers of women/black people/working class people in academia. Women, blacks and poor people have in the past been banned form higher education and told they are of lower intelligence. There is also no pay difference between gingers and non-gingers, but there is a pay difference - that cannot be fully explained away by hours worked - between men and women doing the same job.
    At my university and at the others I applied for there are consistently more women than men. This is reflected at a national level, there are more women going to university than men. How do you conclude from that that women are being kept out of academia?

    However I'm doing an engineering course which is probably 80+% men, and it just so happens to be a degree that offeres very high paying jobs, so that's a part of the pay gap problem right there :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    what you believe causes the pay gap is very different from reality.

    Countless sociologists have argued it is due to sexism: Oakley, Greer, Giddens, Marxists to name a few. And they all know far more about the matter than you do.
    Argued, it's down to sexism. Countless sociologists, economists, and professors, have proven using sound statistical and scientific evidence that the pay gap is caused by a whole myriad of things - and that less than 1% of it is because of any kind of mad conspiracy that men have set up to be universally sexist. This is what I hate about feminism, they see someone making a non-backed up statement based on anecdotal evidence as a fact.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.