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

Gender pay gap equates to 1.2 billion women working for nothing Watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JohnGreek)
    Sorry, I should have explained that point better (at the beach rn)

    Basically, it shouldn't be taboo to ask a woman as to whether she's thinking of having a baby when she enters her late 20s-30s. Under the status quo, you're having companies move away from promoting women on a perceived fear of her having to take time out for her children. This punishes women who don't plan on raising a family in the foreseeable future.

    Equal time taken out for maternity/paternity leave could also help bridge the gap. Have a woman spend the first few months with her newborn, and then force her husband to spend an equal amount of time with the child. The time shouldn't be transferrable.
    so jelly , meanwhile at work and on tsr
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Typical guy. "I know a bloke who x, hence those studies can't be true coz I know one counterexample" or "something totally random" looooool. :rolleyes:

    Just two articles, there are many.

    https://www.ft.com/content/51c81a8c-...1-d87a9fea034f

    http://www.businessinsider.com/subtl...rk-2014-6?IR=T
    That business insider list is laughable
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samendra)
    So your saying women arent nerdy, without evidence, as usual?
    Does working in the software industry for 16 years count? During that time I worked with only 2 women. I now teach girls computing. The interest drops off around year 8, something I plan to tackle. What are you doing about it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Does working in the software industry for 16 years count? During that time I worked with only 2 women. I now teach girls computing. The interest drops off around year 8, something I plan to tackle. What are you doing about it?
    Why are you trying to get them interested, they are exposed to computing from primary school till year 9, they will decide if they like it or not. It just happens that most girls don't like computing, looks like you are trying to force your interests onto them because you feel lonely, why does it matter how many of whatever gender you've worked with? why does gender even come up?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    The gender pay gap accurately reflects the gender abortion gap in china. Of course men make more in less developed countries. Work isn't white collar enough for work to be fun in these countries yet. So women are fine letting the men do all the hard work down the mines and in factories. When marketing and sales jobs start popping up in Sierra Leone. I'm sure women will start demanding to work.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samendra)
    Why are you trying to get them interested, they are exposed to computing from primary school till year 9, they will decide if they like it or not. It just happens that most girls don't like computing, looks like you are trying to force your interests onto them because you feel lonely, why does it matter how many of whatever gender you've worked with? why does gender even come up?
    What an arrogant and ignorant response. I have nothing more to say.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    What an arrogant response. I have nothing more to say.
    Lol, typical response of a person who has no valid point to make. Plus how was that arrogant when the children have chosen not to go into a certain field after being taught it for over 5 years?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    The gender pay gap is the biggest load of ****, I'm saying this and I'm a female
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    The BBC wasn't unequal pay for equal work, entertainment is results driven. Yes we can continue this in April but until then you have no real cause to believe men and women are being paid unequally for equal work
    These are the same people that think the LFC mens and women's teams should be paid the same despite one generating all the revenue
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samendra)
    Lol, typical response of a person who has no valid point to make. Plus how was that arrogant when the children have chosen not to go into a certain field after being taught it for over 5 years?
    Do you choose options that have given you a negative experience? Maybe making the experience less negative for girls might be a step in the right direction?

    Just out of curiosity, if it were men who were suffering a 10% difference in pay to the negative, I presume you should just bury your head and accept it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Do you choose options that have given you a negative experience? Maybe making the experience less negative for girls might be a step in the right direction?

    Just out of curiosity, if it were men who were suffering a 10% difference in pay to the negative, I presume you should just bury your head and accept it?
    Yea negative because they didn't enjoy it, if I liked a subject I would carry it on as far as I could have, because I didn't I don't like the subject, negative experience in one subject = dislike. That's the thing though women ARENT suffering a 10% difference in pay, less women go into certain careers which makes it seem like there is a pay gap when there isn't.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samendra)
    women go into certain careers which makes it seem like there is a pay gap when there isn't.
    And that is the question you seem reluctant to answer. Are you suggesting genetics explains why women don't become politicians, bankers or CEOs?

    Or, as you alluded to, perhaps negative experiences or perceptions are responsible?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Typical guy. "I know a bloke who x, hence those studies can't be true coz I know one counterexample" or "something totally random" looooool. :rolleyes:

    Just two articles, there are many.

    https://www.ft.com/content/51c81a8c-...1-d87a9fea034f

    http://www.businessinsider.com/subtl...rk-2014-6?IR=T
    Willful misunderstanding. The point is if it happens to men too how is it an exclusively female issue? If someone says being murdered is exclusively a white issue but a black person is killed then they're clearly talking rubbish - same applies. If you're claiming its always women, but it isn't, then you're talking nonsense. It was further demonstration of the point not all ideas are equal.

    You have no idea about me as a person, and how does this comment about a 'typical guy' fit with your worldview of removing generalisation because, say, someone is a woman? Fine one way but not the other I guess.

    The first page doesnt exist according to my browser.

    The article immediately quotes a book called 'the new soft war on women' from a journalism professor, seems totally without bias to quote someone most of the mainstream has never even heard of and who has a clear ideological stance. From the Amazon page 'In The New Soft War on Women, respected experts on gender issue' - no such thing, nobody outside of gender studies cares what 'gender issue experts' say. The rest of the writeup is just a rehashing of the 'look aggregation creates difference therefore sexism' which is the stupidest way to intentionally misread stats possible. It also makes reference to this undefined 'bias' which it doesn't demonstrate - same as your earlier post. Just saying it doesn't make it true.

    The first example is another biased quote (the entire book is based on that principle though I'm willing to give a psychologist BOD) however this 'Women have to walk a thin line between being too nice and too forceful' shows the fundamental lack of understanding. So do blokes. This is a universal issue.

    The business test was conducted by Sandberg without any proper controls or experimental method and even despite that In two of the questions the women comes out on top, (‘likability’ and ‘would you work for this person’). While we can say the 'Likability' (8.0 vs 7.6) is about even, the 'work for' comes in at 83% vs 65%. Shouldn't this signify discrimination against the man, as much as the 'trust' question is discrimination against a woman? The test doesnt even conclusively demonstrate its own premise.

    "Hiring managers will offer a slightly lower salary because they think they can get away with it," says Rhodes. And because women are often so grateful to get the position, she says they are less likely to negotiate the offer, which compounds and perpetuates the cycle of lower pay. This is a womens problem, demand more or shut up. A lot of people get no ability to negotiate because they're on minimum wage so stop complaining you don't have the confidence to demand more for your services. This is nothing to do with the perception of women, this is to do with women themselves.

    Women are less likely to get credit in group projects. Not demonstrated. No evidence, and its quoting the same person again (homogeneous sources).

    "I think the environment is such that even in the position I am now, everyone's first impression is that I'm not qualified to do the job.' So 'I think' is evidence now. She has no idea what other people assume.

    The study meant to prove discrimination in the next point says this '

    • McKinsey developed four metrics that can serve as hallmarks of a truly gender-diverse company. They include a starting position that reflects individual talent; the number of women at the top of the organization; odds of promotion equivalent to men; and the mix of women in line roles versus staff roles (Exhibit).

    When did she become qualified to judge the individual talent of people in an industry she doesnt work in? Also that point and the point of equivalent promotion or number of women at the top are at odds, if its based on talent then the metric of how many of x is irrelevant. Also sometimes you need more talented people on the ground level, you don't make your best marksman lead the platoon.

    Talkative men are seen as competent, and talkative women as incompetent. Same as before, what are they saying?

    When men show anger it looks like strength, but when women do the same, they are perceived as too emotional and out of control. Evidence? How many minds did you read like Men in Black or something? Also is it because the bloke swears at a person who annoys them whereas the woman cries and throws a half hour temper tantrum? I don't know but not all flourishes of anger are the same and thus are interpreted differently ie if someone was angry because they lost a pencil you'd think them weird, but if they were angry because the computer deleted a full days work you'd understand.

    they believe women will direct more effort towards their kids. Maybe because as a general trend its https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...true-for-women

    Women presenters at male-dominated events have a harder time getting the attention of the room. How do they measure level of attention?

    The social events thing is nonsense.

    The dress thing is probably down to in part women have a much higher range of options and therefore make more errors due to this. A skirt and a smart top is acceptable in an office during the summer, but a bloke must wear a full suit all the time 24/7 at work. Even at my current part time job, a man must always tuck in his shirt, do up the top button and wear a tie. Women can wear a little necktie thing and undo any buttons they like which obviously is much better for the heat of the kitchen. Before you spout off about anecdotes look up the dress code of any institutions you like, womens codes are more flexible if any flexibility is afforded.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GonvilleBromhead)
    Willful misunderstanding. The point is if it happens to men too how is it an exclusively female issue? If someone says being murdered is exclusively a white issue but a black person is killed then they're clearly talking rubbish - same applies. If you're claiming its always women, but it isn't, then you're talking nonsense. It was further demonstration of the point not all ideas are equal.

    You have no idea about me as a person, and how does this comment about a 'typical guy' fit with your worldview of removing generalisation because, say, someone is a woman? Fine one way but not the other I guess.
    I do, I have seen you post.

    Who claimed it is always women? :rolleyes:

    That is why I don't engage with people like you. You even mention "willful misunderstanding" and then go on to do just that. Sad.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    How patronising. I suppose you will be telling me next that house work is well suited to women?
    No straw-man arguments please!



    (Original post by ByEeek)
    As a society we should be encouraging men to go into nursery and primary education to act as role models to our young children
    You can't go into work with little children without I worked in primary schools for some time, this definitely isn't for everyone. Women usually have better emotional abilities to communicate with children, and that is probably why they work in such places.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    just as we should be encouraging women into engineering to provide inputs into solutions. I find it bizarre that consumer items used by women are designed and built by men. What an opportunity for someone who can bring women into the design of cutting edge technology?
    This is pure speculation. Something is not being done, and you suppose that it would be better if this was done. You have absolutely no basis for that.



    (Original post by ByEeek)
    This has nothing to do with the suitability of jobs. Women are equal to men in ability, possibly even more able. It is however a good question to ask why so few men take up working in nursery and primary education in the same way that it is a good question to ask why so few women work in engineering. But suitability has nothing to do with it.
    Women are equal, by no means they are exactly the same. On average they have slightly different abilities than men, there is doubt about that, which means that usually they will always be better in slightly different jobs, which sometimes can cause some pay differences. I feel like I'm talking to some utopist who has no idea on the basics of gender differences, or economy but yet you feel competent enough to judge what should be changed in entire society.

    Morever you did not adress most of my points on economy, therefore I shall consider this unproductive conversation as finished.


    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Just out of curiosity, if it were men who were suffering a 10% difference in pay to the negative, I presume you should just bury your head and accept it?
    I would. I'm a classical liberal.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    Women usually have better emotional abilities to communicate with children, and that is probably why they work in such places.
    Are you saying that I [a man] am unable to work with small children because I am a man?


    (Original post by PTMalewski)
    I feel like I'm talking to some utopist
    Not at all. But I am getting fed up of arguing the toss with men who seem to be defending the fact that there is a disparity. I am yet to find a woman that thinks the gender gap is acceptable, yet men like yourself seem to be queuing to to effectively say - "Women - you need to try harder if you want equal pay."

    One question - if men were on 10% less would you just accept it on the basis that clearly women are 10% better than men and men simply choose lower paid work?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    And that is the question you seem reluctant to answer. Are you suggesting genetics explains why women don't become politicians, bankers or CEOs?

    Or, as you alluded to, perhaps negative experiences or perceptions are responsible?
    I don't know why they don't, I just know that they don't due to pure statistics. Though I imagine that it is something to do with the fact that women are more caring and motherly than a man in general hence go into teaching etc.. Women and Men are equal but have different skill sets, it just happens that Men's skillset makes more money.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Are you saying that I [a man] am unable to work with small children because I am a man?
    Not you particularly, but men are usually worse in that field, then it's more likely that a random man will perform worse in such job than a random woman. You, specificly, can be an individual that is different to the average values.
    Although I admit I don't know any research in that field. I only know that it is scientifically proven that men and women differ on average, and I know some research that tells exactly about some of the differences such as IQ, memory, ability to see and distinct colours, strenght etc.
    And many fathers say that their wives are jolly well better in taking care of their children while they are little.Therefore as a classical liberal I presume that if all or almost all of the nursery teachers are women, then women are jolly well better in that job than men.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Not at all. But I am getting fed up of arguing the toss with men who seem to be defending the fact that there is a disparity.
    But there must be! Weaker men earn less than strong men, more intelligent earn more than less inteligent (on average). Secretaries must have good memory, while designers must be more creative, and so on so on. Different qualities give different money, and you can always find some groups which earns less or more on average.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    One question - if men were on 10% less would you just accept it on the basis that clearly women are 10% better than men
    Nobody says that someone is better or worse in general. Idividual people have different qualities on higher and lower level, as well as populations tend to have average leveles of various qualities a bit different. And different qualities pay differently. Thats all. For example. Out of two people, if one has IQ of 85 and can carry 50 kilograms and the other has 90 but can carry 20, the less intelligent will earn more, because he is unintelligent for brain work anyway, but he can carry more, then he can work more effectively. It doesn't mean he's better, it only means that he is more efficient in jobs for people with low IQ.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    and men simply choose lower paid work?
    Already said that I'm a classical liberal. I think that free market usually effects in meritocracy.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I don't understand how myths like this can be so widespread.

    Women are vastly more likely to work part-time, take career breaks etc. It is entirely logical that they get paid less, on average. After all, they are doing less work, on average.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    " We show that EGI has only been improving slowly and that current aggregate EGI is equivalent to 1.2 billion women working for nothing. Moreover, this gap is expected to increase in coming decades. Instrumental variable estimates suggest that while increases in income reduce EGI, living standards will have to triple for equality to be achieved in countries such as Mexico or Turkey."

    https://ideas.repec.org/p/lec/leecon/17-14.html

    :eek3:
    The new doctor who is a woman
    The new lead role in Star Wars is a woman
    The new lead roles in Star Trek are women
    Everyone isn't saying how awesome Wonder Woman is as a feminist
    The British PM is a woman
    The most powerful person in Europe, Angela Merkel is a woman

    WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT!?!?!?
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • 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.

  • 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

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