4 ms·

I suppose you can hand-wave the aggregate results away if you're comfortable with that 3-6% gap. But your argument basically amounts to "what matters to you doe

I suppose you can hand-wave the aggregate results away if you're comfortable with that 3-6% gap. But your argument basically amounts to "what matters to you doesn't matter to me, so I consider it insignificant". I do consider 3-6% damning. If you only compare women to other women, of course you won't see a wage gap; you can blame it all on the individual. It's this willingness to value personal views of the world to minimize the facts that allows the gap to continue. Do you really think you can reason about systemic discrimination by looking at the individual? That's as ineffable as wondering why some people win the lotto; individuals are dominated by noise, and you only see the disparity in aggregate. Why bother commenting if you don't care about the wage gap?

sheepmullet 10y ago
> I do consider 3-6% damning. You do realise the gap is just the "unexplained by standard corrections" and not "% due to sexism" right? > Why bother commenting if you don't care about the wage gap? I care that you are using misleading statistics to push an agenda.
- throwaway91111 10y ago
  The shitty part is the gap, not the explanation. Are you seriously defending a wage gap because you're skeptical about why it exists? That's why it exists. At no point did I state I thought the wage gap is entirely due to sexism. although, I do argue it is evident sexism; I believe that still requires argument on your part that it's clearly not.