2 ms·
Right, but my point is that if you have actively experienced discrimation, you're less likely to judge the research as unwarranted. You can argue with my off-th
by 1auralynn 9y ago
Right, but my point is that if you have actively experienced discrimation, you're less likely to judge the research as unwarranted. You can argue with my off-the-cuff example, but as you mentioned there are many documented cases of discrimination that are hard to argue with.
The 2-6% difference in wages (depending on which study you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_the_United_S...) can still be very significant.
And of course we should continue to discuss all the other reasons women don't end up going into high paying jobs.
- throwaway92224 9y agoRight, but my point is that if you have actively experienced discrimination, you're less likely to judge the research as unwarranted. The research is warranted, but seems not to support the idea that discrimination is a major driver in the difference in career outcomes or lifetime earnings. And of course we should continue to discuss all the other reasons women don't end up going into high paying jobs. Why should we do that?