Well, yes, those first couple paragraphs are the data. Everyone, even those who disagree with you, are aware of that. But people who disagree with you have cons

Well, yes, those first couple paragraphs are the data. Everyone, even those who disagree with you, are aware of that. But people who disagree with you have considered other things, too. One such thing is the question of whether income is genetically determined. Well, there are 3 characteristics (aside from the direct sexual characteristics of genitals, mammaries, and presence/absence of a womb) that are associated with sex sufficiently well that describing them is a strong predictor of sex. Those are vocal register, height, and physical strength. 2/3rds of those factors make it awfully unlikely women will be playing in the NBA and getting those salaries. But the number of jobs where those characteristics are strong predictors of performance is vanishingly small. So why are women making less money at the median? Women aren't genetically predisposed to desiring a better quality of life. If that's a real factor, there has to be a non-genetic reason underlying it. And that's what people are looking for. You can't just dismiss that as feminism. As if there's something wrong with that? Precisely what are you coding in your assertion that something is just because of feminism? That it's worth less? That it's not important? If not those, why bring it up at all?