4 ms·

>According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disp.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disp.... many studies have

>According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disp.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disp.... many studies have found that there is a persistent gap that remains, even when you control for education level, hours worked, experience, etc. It does not say that. It says one single economist testified to that affect. And that others offered rebuttals. Controlling for hours worked, education, experience, etc leaves you with the opposite of what you think: there is no gap. And the exact page you are linking to points out that the gap also goes the other direction when you don't account for confounding factors, do you also think there is widespread sexism against men lowering their income? "According to an analysis of Census Bureau data released by Reach Advisors in 2008, single childless women between ages 22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts in most United States cities, with incomes that were 8% greater than males on average" The only studies I've seen that claim there is still an unexplained difference after accounting for confounding factors all have the same flaw. They do not actually account for hours worked. They classify "full time" as all the same. When 60 hours and 40 hours are considered the same, you are not controlling for hours worked. They end up with figures at around 5% pay gap. Which confirms the nonexistence of this gap, as the average full time hours per day of a man is 8.14, and a woman is 7.75. The US department of labor commissioned a report on the subject. They found that there is no wage gap, the pay gap can be fully explained by differences in work (job choice, hours worked, etc): http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20...

trhtrsh 14y ago
Did you read the paragraph you quoted? It contradicts your claim. > According to an analysis of Census Bureau data released by Reach Advisors in 2008, single childless women between ages 22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts in most United States cities, with incomes that were 8% greater than males on average. This shift is driven by the growing ranks of women who attend colleges and move on to high-earning jobs.[7] "[7]" is http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704421104575463790770831192.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442110457546... > While these particular women earn more than their male peers, women on the whole haven't reached equal status in any particular job or education level. For instance, women with a bachelor's degree had median earnings of $39,571 between 2006 and 2008, compared with $59,079 for men at the same education level, according to the Census. > At every education level, from high-school dropouts to Ph.D.s, women continue to earn less than their male peers. the "8% advantage", and all the differences quoted in this article, clearly do not control for the type of work performed.
- btilly 14y ago
  It always astonishes me to see people selectively quote a source that says the exact opposite of what they want it to say. I've seen it happen often enough that I shouldn't be surprised, but I have trouble understanding the level of fundamental dishonesty that is required to do that.
- papsosouid 14y ago
  Yes, I did read it. You misunderstood "my claim". I was not trying to imply that the study in question supports the idea that men make less than women, rather using it to demonstrate that not controlling all the other factors that effect income shows wildly varying results depending on which factors you do try to control and which you let effect it. >women on the whole haven't reached equal status in any particular job or education level. For instance, women with a bachelor's degree had median earnings of $39,571 between 2006 and 2008, compared with $59,079 for men at the same education level, according to the Census. Right, when you don't control for anything, you see a gap. The gap dissappears when you actually control for those factors. How does that contradict what I said? >the "8% advantage", and all the differences quoted in this article, clearly do not control for the type of work performed. Right, I was not suggesting that the pay gap is reversed, I am suggesting it is entirely accounted for by factors other than sexism. That you aren't complaining about men making less than women shows that you already accept that fact, you just only accept it when it is men making less, and discard it when it is women making less. Despite those two scenarios being just a case of controlling for different factors.
  - btilly 14y ago
    Right, when you don't control for anything, you see a gap. The gap dissappears when you actually control for those factors. How does that contradict what I said? According to the evidence cited in the Wikipedia link, the consensus of MOST researchers is that, even after accounting for every factor that we can account for, there remains a persistent male/female gap. The existence of this gap may not be the result of sexism. For instance read http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_work_for_a_large_multinational_tech_company_i/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_wor... where equal treatment of men and women who are doing equal jobs results in VERY different compensation for women. In the same light http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/career/negotiating-a-higher-salary-how-women-differ-from-men/459 http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/career/negotiating-a-higher... shows that the anecdote is supported in wider ranging statistics.

trhtrsh 14y ago

Did you read the paragraph you quoted? It contradicts your claim. > According to an analysis of Census Bureau data released by Reach Advisors in 2008, single childless women between ages 22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts in most United States cities, with incomes that were 8% greater than males on average. This shift is driven by the growing ranks of women who attend colleges and move on to high-earning jobs.[7] "[7]" is http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704421104575463790770831192.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442110457546... > While these particular women earn more than their male peers, women on the whole haven't reached equal status in any particular job or education level. For instance, women with a bachelor's degree had median earnings of $39,571 between 2006 and 2008, compared with $59,079 for men at the same education level, according to the Census. > At every education level, from high-school dropouts to Ph.D.s, women continue to earn less than their male peers. the "8% advantage", and all the differences quoted in this article, clearly do not control for the type of work performed.

btilly 14y ago
It always astonishes me to see people selectively quote a source that says the exact opposite of what they want it to say. I've seen it happen often enough that I shouldn't be surprised, but I have trouble understanding the level of fundamental dishonesty that is required to do that.
papsosouid 14y ago
Yes, I did read it. You misunderstood "my claim". I was not trying to imply that the study in question supports the idea that men make less than women, rather using it to demonstrate that not controlling all the other factors that effect income shows wildly varying results depending on which factors you do try to control and which you let effect it. >women on the whole haven't reached equal status in any particular job or education level. For instance, women with a bachelor's degree had median earnings of $39,571 between 2006 and 2008, compared with $59,079 for men at the same education level, according to the Census. Right, when you don't control for anything, you see a gap. The gap dissappears when you actually control for those factors. How does that contradict what I said? >the "8% advantage", and all the differences quoted in this article, clearly do not control for the type of work performed. Right, I was not suggesting that the pay gap is reversed, I am suggesting it is entirely accounted for by factors other than sexism. That you aren't complaining about men making less than women shows that you already accept that fact, you just only accept it when it is men making less, and discard it when it is women making less. Despite those two scenarios being just a case of controlling for different factors.
- btilly 14y ago
  Right, when you don't control for anything, you see a gap. The gap dissappears when you actually control for those factors. How does that contradict what I said? According to the evidence cited in the Wikipedia link, the consensus of MOST researchers is that, even after accounting for every factor that we can account for, there remains a persistent male/female gap. The existence of this gap may not be the result of sexism. For instance read http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_work_for_a_large_multinational_tech_company_i/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/hvv2m/i_wor... where equal treatment of men and women who are doing equal jobs results in VERY different compensation for women. In the same light http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/career/negotiating-a-higher-salary-how-women-differ-from-men/459 http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/career/negotiating-a-higher... shows that the anecdote is supported in wider ranging statistics.