41 ms·

Why was this downvoted? Women tend not to be crazy like men and thus are more likely to choose fulfiling careers that have lower pay, and seek more work life

by vivekd 8y ago

Why was this downvoted? Women tend not to be crazy like men and thus are more likely to choose fulfiling careers that have lower pay, and seek more work life balance. When accounting for these factors, the existence of a gender pay gap becomes more questionable.

felix_nagaand 8y ago
Citations needed
- austincheney 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning Perhaps you can find the citation yourself and use it to counter the point you are replying to.
  - flyingcircus3 8y ago
    I don't follow the connection between your link and your comment. The user you replied to was, themselves, replying to another user making appeals to expertise about what "the literature" says, without actually supplying that literature. The burden of proof is on the person making the claims. What is freely asserted is freely dismissed. How would the user you replied to even go about searching for the citation, given so little information to go off of? The link you provided seems to allude to someone announcing their personal preference, which should not have to be defended. Assertions of what scientific literature have established as accepted wisdom are free game for questioning. That's what gives theories their fundamental efficacy, being able to withstand reasonable criticism.
    - austincheney 8y ago
      > What is freely asserted is freely dismissed. Then kindly leave it at that. It is, after all, the nature of friendly and disagreeable conversation. Crying to me about it certainly isn't productive.
      - flyingcircus3 8y ago
        You made an assertion that someone was being unreasonable in their requests for citations. You projected some buzzword made up by a webcomic, and then tried to associate it with something else entirely, as if demanding citations is the province of mouth breathers. You then misinterpreted my reply in the worst possible light, to fit the conspiracy that supports your original points. And now you're playing the victim card yourself because you have no further merits to argue. If simple enumeration of the fallacies contained your arguments is seen as a personal attack, You don't have a lot of ground to stand on when you accuse other people of being trolls.
        austincheney 8y ago
        I think the misunderstanding here is that a conversation is not a contest. There aren't combatants or winners. But, there certainly is potential for harassment, emotion, and aggression of which all are unnecessary. If you want a citation then go find it. Don't expect other people to do YOUR work for YOU. For more information on trolling: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/troll/Avoiding_Trolls.md https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/troll/Avoiding_Tro... Anybody who anticipates a conversation is a thing that can be won, as in a contest or battle, is probably a troll.
- vivekd 8y ago
  work life balance: Men work longer hours https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/06/30/new-report-men-work-longer-hours-than-women/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/06/30/new-repo... Women tend to choose more fulfilling lower paying careers (last point on fortune and second last on time) http://fortune.com/2018/04/10/gender-pay-gap-myths/ http://fortune.com/2018/04/10/gender-pay-gap-myths/ http://time.com/5230911/equal-pay-day-2018-wage-gap-myths/ http://time.com/5230911/equal-pay-day-2018-wage-gap-myths/ I don't have the original studies but I think the news sources here are fairly reliable
BadassFractal 8y ago
It gets downvoted because that topic has long transcended being a discussion about interpretation of available data, and has instead turned into a cultural and moral battle over "liberators of the oppressed" vs "evil misogynists" or "whiny snowflakes" vs "those who pull themselves by their bootstraps". Almost impossible to make any progress in it without appeal to emotion and in-group/out-group dynamics.
- wavegeek 8y ago
  But still there is an actual set of facts here.
mmt 8y ago
Despite the guideline-flouting/flame-attracting wording, I think there's a kernel of a point here: it's important to consider two seperate pay-gap issues (be it for gender, race, or any other class): 1) equal pay for equal work 2) equal represenatation among (higher paying) jobs I routinely see these two issues conflated, and occasionally the purported resolution of #1 for gender being trotted as evidence of no more "gap". Although I can see how that could be characterized as "cherry-picking" a statistic, it doesn't make the statistic any less valid, and it detracts from the real problem of conflation. If it's true, then additional effort at #1 would, indeed, be wasted. It would be better to criticize the notion of just one "gap" rather than any cherry-picking. How does this relate to the topic at hand? The original commentor suggested a problem of conflation, between "unemployed" and "jobless". Elsewhere in the thread, it's been discussed whether workforce participation is a more meaningful metric. Even that risks conflating "employed" with "fully employed" (as opposed to "underemployed", such as part time or working for a lower wage). Real wage growth comes up repeatedly, presumably because of that confounding factor.
- vivekd 8y ago
  not every post has to be completely on topic, it was topical to the issue of unreliable figures skewing economic data which was what the subtopic was about. I admit he was bringing up an inflammatory topic, but really I expect a place like hacker news to have a user base that can handle that objectively As for equal pay for equal work - I'd be very surprised if women aren't getting that, because that's illegal and you'd expect that to show up in the form of many many lawsuits. Yes there does seem to be an issue of some workplaces that have a boys club type environment and fail to promote women - but I don't know if that's big enough to explain the dramatic wage gaps that are touted by some people.
  - ZainRiz 8y ago
    If there is a pay gap, I suspect it's at least partially determined by a person's tendency to negotiate salary. There are many articles about how salary negotiation is crucial when applying for a job, yet many women and men often accept the first offer a company makes to them (which is usually a low ball offer). Negotiating a higher salary requires a bit more drive/aggressiveness than the average person has. Making up numbers here, if you say that only 20% of the population has that personality trait, men seem more likely to have that trait (perhaps 15% of men have it and 5% of women), which would contribute to the equal pay for equal work gap. To rephrase my above statement, the current job market rewards certain personality types with higher positions & salaries, and men seem to have a higher chance of having that personality. A completely separate question is: Is the above an acceptable situation? I would say no. For example, more men are three times more likely to be psychopaths than women [1], and CEOs have a much higher chance of being psychopaths than the general population [2]. There's a strong chance that certain psychopathic tendencies are rewarded in the current corporate structure. Similarly, there are other stories you hear of there being a lot of backstabbing in certain companies at the higher levels. Personality types that are disinclined to engage in that will be unlikely to climb the corporate ladder there. It's probably in the best interest of all companies and society in general that these kind of personality traits are not rewarded unless they are actually beneficial. By fixing the problem at this level we'll not only be solving the gender/pay gap between men and women but also the gender pay/gap between differing personalities within a given gender as well. [1](https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/mental-disorders/psychopaths2.htm https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/mental-disord...) [2](http://www.businessinsider.com/ceos-often-have-psychopathic-traits-2017-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/ceos-often-have-psychopathic-...)
noelsusman 8y ago
First, when you control for everything there is still a gap, it's just smaller. 94 cents on the dollar is nothing to sneeze at. Second, when you do that you're sort of controlling the problem away. Women don't seek more work/life balance because they're not as crazy as men. They do it because they're expected to carry more of the burden of raising a child. The literature is clear that the wage gap is relatively small until children enter the picture. After that the gap skyrockets. This is why the main practical goal of every wage gap activist is equalizing the burden of having a child. It's why the number one policy issue is universal mandatory parental leave for both genders.
- vivekd 8y ago
  Well there are other factors you need to control for too, men are more likely to try and choose higher paying jobs because social status and attractiveness to potential mates is impacted by a man's wealth. This is not the case for women, studies show that men are indifferent to a women's economic status when it comes to mate choice and focus more on physical appearance. There certainly is sexism in the workplace, although the court ruled different I think Ellen Pao was a victim of this. That said, I don't know if it as prevalent and widespread so as to lead to meaningful and statistically significant wage gaps when all the factors are considered. Certainly the evidence for this sort of widespread institutionalized sexism is lacking in my mind. Still I think the conversation here is more that the wage gap numbers are not as significant as they are often presented in discourse about gender equality
  - joshuamorton 8y ago
    I'm just going to point out that status-chasing is controlled for in what he described. The .95 cents on the dollar figure appears when you compare populations of men and women in similar roles with similar performance. You're confusing wage gap 1 (pay for performance) with gap 2 (seniority/glass ceiling). Saying you need to control for things that have already been controlled for doesn't leave a particularly good impression.
    - vivekd 8y ago

by vivekd 8y ago

felix_nagaand 8y ago

Citations needed

austincheney 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning Perhaps you can find the citation yourself and use it to counter the point you are replying to.
- flyingcircus3 8y ago
  I don't follow the connection between your link and your comment. The user you replied to was, themselves, replying to another user making appeals to expertise about what "the literature" says, without actually supplying that literature. The burden of proof is on the person making the claims. What is freely asserted is freely dismissed. How would the user you replied to even go about searching for the citation, given so little information to go off of? The link you provided seems to allude to someone announcing their personal preference, which should not have to be defended. Assertions of what scientific literature have established as accepted wisdom are free game for questioning. That's what gives theories their fundamental efficacy, being able to withstand reasonable criticism.
  - austincheney 8y ago
    > What is freely asserted is freely dismissed. Then kindly leave it at that. It is, after all, the nature of friendly and disagreeable conversation. Crying to me about it certainly isn't productive.
    - flyingcircus3 8y ago
      You made an assertion that someone was being unreasonable in their requests for citations. You projected some buzzword made up by a webcomic, and then tried to associate it with something else entirely, as if demanding citations is the province of mouth breathers. You then misinterpreted my reply in the worst possible light, to fit the conspiracy that supports your original points. And now you're playing the victim card yourself because you have no further merits to argue. If simple enumeration of the fallacies contained your arguments is seen as a personal attack, You don't have a lot of ground to stand on when you accuse other people of being trolls.
      - austincheney 8y ago
        I think the misunderstanding here is that a conversation is not a contest. There aren't combatants or winners. But, there certainly is potential for harassment, emotion, and aggression of which all are unnecessary. If you want a citation then go find it. Don't expect other people to do YOUR work for YOU. For more information on trolling: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/troll/Avoiding_Trolls.md https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/troll/Avoiding_Tro... Anybody who anticipates a conversation is a thing that can be won, as in a contest or battle, is probably a troll.
vivekd 8y ago
work life balance: Men work longer hours https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/06/30/new-report-men-work-longer-hours-than-women/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/06/30/new-repo... Women tend to choose more fulfilling lower paying careers (last point on fortune and second last on time) http://fortune.com/2018/04/10/gender-pay-gap-myths/ http://fortune.com/2018/04/10/gender-pay-gap-myths/ http://time.com/5230911/equal-pay-day-2018-wage-gap-myths/ http://time.com/5230911/equal-pay-day-2018-wage-gap-myths/ I don't have the original studies but I think the news sources here are fairly reliable

BadassFractal 8y ago

It gets downvoted because that topic has long transcended being a discussion about interpretation of available data, and has instead turned into a cultural and moral battle over "liberators of the oppressed" vs "evil misogynists" or "whiny snowflakes" vs "those who pull themselves by their bootstraps". Almost impossible to make any progress in it without appeal to emotion and in-group/out-group dynamics.

wavegeek 8y ago
But still there is an actual set of facts here.

mmt 8y ago

Despite the guideline-flouting/flame-attracting wording, I think there's a kernel of a point here: it's important to consider two seperate pay-gap issues (be it for gender, race, or any other class): 1) equal pay for equal work 2) equal represenatation among (higher paying) jobs I routinely see these two issues conflated, and occasionally the purported resolution of #1 for gender being trotted as evidence of no more "gap". Although I can see how that could be characterized as "cherry-picking" a statistic, it doesn't make the statistic any less valid, and it detracts from the real problem of conflation. If it's true, then additional effort at #1 would, indeed, be wasted. It would be better to criticize the notion of just one "gap" rather than any cherry-picking. How does this relate to the topic at hand? The original commentor suggested a problem of conflation, between "unemployed" and "jobless". Elsewhere in the thread, it's been discussed whether workforce participation is a more meaningful metric. Even that risks conflating "employed" with "fully employed" (as opposed to "underemployed", such as part time or working for a lower wage). Real wage growth comes up repeatedly, presumably because of that confounding factor.

vivekd 8y ago
not every post has to be completely on topic, it was topical to the issue of unreliable figures skewing economic data which was what the subtopic was about. I admit he was bringing up an inflammatory topic, but really I expect a place like hacker news to have a user base that can handle that objectively As for equal pay for equal work - I'd be very surprised if women aren't getting that, because that's illegal and you'd expect that to show up in the form of many many lawsuits. Yes there does seem to be an issue of some workplaces that have a boys club type environment and fail to promote women - but I don't know if that's big enough to explain the dramatic wage gaps that are touted by some people.
- ZainRiz 8y ago
  If there is a pay gap, I suspect it's at least partially determined by a person's tendency to negotiate salary. There are many articles about how salary negotiation is crucial when applying for a job, yet many women and men often accept the first offer a company makes to them (which is usually a low ball offer). Negotiating a higher salary requires a bit more drive/aggressiveness than the average person has. Making up numbers here, if you say that only 20% of the population has that personality trait, men seem more likely to have that trait (perhaps 15% of men have it and 5% of women), which would contribute to the equal pay for equal work gap. To rephrase my above statement, the current job market rewards certain personality types with higher positions & salaries, and men seem to have a higher chance of having that personality. A completely separate question is: Is the above an acceptable situation? I would say no. For example, more men are three times more likely to be psychopaths than women [1], and CEOs have a much higher chance of being psychopaths than the general population [2]. There's a strong chance that certain psychopathic tendencies are rewarded in the current corporate structure. Similarly, there are other stories you hear of there being a lot of backstabbing in certain companies at the higher levels. Personality types that are disinclined to engage in that will be unlikely to climb the corporate ladder there. It's probably in the best interest of all companies and society in general that these kind of personality traits are not rewarded unless they are actually beneficial. By fixing the problem at this level we'll not only be solving the gender/pay gap between men and women but also the gender pay/gap between differing personalities within a given gender as well. [1](https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/mental-disorders/psychopaths2.htm https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/mental-disord...) [2](http://www.businessinsider.com/ceos-often-have-psychopathic-traits-2017-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/ceos-often-have-psychopathic-...)

noelsusman 8y ago

First, when you control for everything there is still a gap, it's just smaller. 94 cents on the dollar is nothing to sneeze at. Second, when you do that you're sort of controlling the problem away. Women don't seek more work/life balance because they're not as crazy as men. They do it because they're expected to carry more of the burden of raising a child. The literature is clear that the wage gap is relatively small until children enter the picture. After that the gap skyrockets. This is why the main practical goal of every wage gap activist is equalizing the burden of having a child. It's why the number one policy issue is universal mandatory parental leave for both genders.

vivekd 8y ago
Well there are other factors you need to control for too, men are more likely to try and choose higher paying jobs because social status and attractiveness to potential mates is impacted by a man's wealth. This is not the case for women, studies show that men are indifferent to a women's economic status when it comes to mate choice and focus more on physical appearance. There certainly is sexism in the workplace, although the court ruled different I think Ellen Pao was a victim of this. That said, I don't know if it as prevalent and widespread so as to lead to meaningful and statistically significant wage gaps when all the factors are considered. Certainly the evidence for this sort of widespread institutionalized sexism is lacking in my mind. Still I think the conversation here is more that the wage gap numbers are not as significant as they are often presented in discourse about gender equality
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  I'm just going to point out that status-chasing is controlled for in what he described. The .95 cents on the dollar figure appears when you compare populations of men and women in similar roles with similar performance. You're confusing wage gap 1 (pay for performance) with gap 2 (seniority/glass ceiling). Saying you need to control for things that have already been controlled for doesn't leave a particularly good impression.
  - vivekd 8y ago