The pay gap between men and women

[PickelledEggs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HBewI9kta8

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Before I watch the video: do they take into account the earnings of men and women doing the same jobs, or the earnings of each as an aggregate? The former would be an actual talking point, while the latter would be more of the same 3rd Wave bullshit we're all tired of hearing.

[Nonsensei]

The "wage gap" only exists in the broadest of terms, where nothing but aggregate pay between men and women is taken into consideration.

There is also a shockingly high wage gap between children and adults. If we were to follow the same logic as the wage gap premise, the fact that children aren't legally allowed to work would not be taken into consideration when arriving at a conclusion on the subject.

[GSOgymrat]

Yes, it's Vox, but I find this a good explanation of the gender wage gap.

http://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/12108126/gender-wage-gap-explained-real

[PickelledEggs]

Before I watch the video: do they take into account the earnings of men and women doing the same jobs, or the earnings of each as an aggregate? The former would be an actual talking point, while the latter would be more of the same 3rd Wave bullshit we're all tired of hearing.

not going to say anything other than it's a female hosting a discussion of two females with opposing views on the subject.

[PickelledEggs]

I don't really like the "Feminist OWNED" bait titles. They tend to stir up too much heat and distract people from the actual point and what the people said. I guess they find that it works for clicks and watches though...

[Baruch]

Socialists who favor one gender or one race over another ... including the one's presently favored ... want it because they want it.

Build time machine, send all socialists back to Soviet Union circa 1936 so can have nice socialist paradise.  Worst case, can act as bullet catchers at Stalingrad.

[Hakurei Reimu]

The "pay gap" is nothing more than the Yule-Simpson effect in action.

[Baruch]

?? Liars use statistics or statistics lie ... because people can't understand probability or percentages??

[Shiranu]

For me, the pay gap is just a symptom of a much larger issue... that women have, predominately, been discouraged from getting into STEM fields and are culturally locked out of high paying corporate jobs. When you are raised and not encouraged to pursue high paying jobs but rather frankly harder and more important jobs that pay significantly less (nurses, teachers, traditionally "women's" jobs, of course you are going to make less money.

[Nonsensei]

For me, the pay gap is just a symptom of a much larger issue... that women have, predominately, been discouraged from getting into STEM fields and are culturally locked out of high paying corporate jobs. When you are raised and not encouraged to pursue high paying jobs but rather frankly harder and more important jobs that pay significantly less (nurses, teachers, traditionally "women's" jobs, of course you are going to make less money.

Oh hey check out this article I found on pbs.org.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers/

It essentially lays your position to waste.

[Shiranu]

Oh hey check out this article I found on pbs.org.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers/

It essentially lays your position to waste.

That's interesting numbers, since the government differs... significantly.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/10/21/women-still-underrepresented-in-stem-fields

According to the Census Bureau's 2009 American Community Survey, women comprise 48 percent of the U.S. workforce but just 24 percent of workers in STEM fields. Half as many women are working in STEM jobs as would be expected if gender representation in STEM professions mirrored the overall workforce.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, women make up 47 percent of the total U.S. workforce, but are much less represented in particular science and engineering occupations. They comprise 39 percent of chemists and material scientists, 28 percent of environmental scientists and geoscientists, 16 percent of chemical engineers and just 12 percent of civil engineers.

http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/womeninstemagaptoinnovation8311.pdf

Although women fill close to half of all jobs in the U.S. economy, they hold less than 25 percent
of STEM jobs. This has been the case throughout the past decade, even as college educated women have increased their share of the overall workforce.

Women with STEM jobs earned 33 percent more than comparable women in non-STEM jobs â€" considerably higher than the STEM premium for men. As a result, the gender wage gap is smaller in STEM jobs than in non-STEM jobs.

Women hold a disproportionately low share of STEM undergraduate degrees, particularly in engineering.

Women with a STEM degree are less likely than their male counterparts to work in a STEM occupation; they are more likely to work in education or healthcare.

There are many possible factors contributing to the discrepancy of women and men in STEM jobs, including: a lack of female role models, gender stereotyping, and less family-friendly flexibility in the STEM fields. Regardless of the causes, the findings of this report provide evidence
of a need to encourage and support women in STEM.

So much for destroying my argument. And as the last one points out, even when women do have STEM jobs they are "lesser" jobs such as education rather than actual scientific research.

All power to pbs, I think they are a great organization, but they fluffed the shot on this one.

[Nonsensei]

Sorry Shiranu but I can't help but feel your response was weak. An emotional article bereft of supporting evidence written by someone who views the topic the same way as you do.

As to your government source, I'll let the conclusions speak for themselves.

The  underrepresentation  of  women  in  STEM  majors  and  jobs  may  be  attributable  to  a  variety  of
factors.    These  may  include  different  choices  men and  women  typically  make  in  response  to  incentives  in  STEM  education  and  STEM  employmentâ€"for example, STEM career paths may be less accommodating to people cycling in and out of the workforce to raise a family

While  this  report does  not  and  cannot explain why  gender  differences  in  STEM  exist,  it  does  aim to  provide  data  and  insight  that  will  enable  more informed policymaking.   

The problem with cherry picking quotes out of a study and then presenting them as support for your argument is that you run the risk of someone actually reading your source, word for word, page by page and finding some things in it that do not support your argument an even undermine your use of the source in the first place.

As with the wage gap, this sort of study takes the topic in aggregate, barely spending any time talking about what genders are dominant in which aspects of the STEM fields. Instead it focuses almost exclusively on men vs women in stem using a birds eye view of the situation that doesn't distinguish any factors other than gender.

It certainly does absolutely NOTHING to address the refutation of your position that certain fields in STEM are male dominated because women aren't very interested in them. But I guess to certain types of feminists that sort of thought process is an anathema. Women aren't permitted to be generally uninterested in math and computer science. In the eyes of a feminist admitting that would somehow equate to admitting that women are "inferior".

The irony doesnt escape me that by arguing against this particular "feminist" position I am in fact defending women at large by asserting that there is nothing WRONG with them for being uninterested in certain professions. Men are also uninterested in certain professions and nobody is screeching about that.

But of course a feminist would just say that its because women are somehow held back or rejected by some mythical centuries old boys club that spans the globe or some shit. Or that a difference in interests are cruelly drilled into children at an early age, maliciously preventing women from entering traditionally male positions. Oh, except for the women that do enter them despite this gendered brainwashing that is supposedly taking place. Hard to explain that one away isn't it?

Why is it so hard a pill to swallow that women are inherently interested in different stuff than men? We accept these sorts of differences between the sexes in literally every other aspect of life, but not professions for some reason. Why is that?

[Baruch]

Most people aren't fit for STEM, and most don't like it if they try it.  Like saying every American needs to move up the food chain and become a lawyer.  Most people I know at work aren't fit to use a PC.  The idea that you can add pixie dust and make a STEM worker is false.  It takes more than a degree, it takes years of experience in some industry (like architecture for example).  Most people fail at STEM careers anyway, it is very competitive, like pro-sports.  Mostly the existing technical folks don't want a wave of kids trampling in their garden ... getting a good assignment, from a senior engineer, when you are a junior engineer ... is hard to come by.  I can count them on one hand, in 10 years in Aerospace.  Good assignments go to the senior engineers who are already there.  The guild system is still in place.  And management is scared of the sorcerer's apprentice.  Besides, all software will be done in India, and all hardware will be done in China.

So the government is wanting to turn all the veterans into cybercrime cops ... that will turn out well ;-)

[drunkenshoe]

It certainly does absolutely NOTHING to address the refutation of your position that certain fields in STEM are male dominated because women aren't very interested in them. But I guess to certain types of feminists that sort of thought process is an anathema. Women aren't permitted to be generally uninterested in math and computer science. In the eyes of a feminist admitting that would somehow equate to admitting that women are "inferior".

The irony doesnt escape me that by arguing against this particular "feminist" position I am in fact defending women at large by asserting that there is nothing WRONG with them for being uninterested in certain professions. Men are also uninterested in certain professions and nobody is screeching about that.

But of course a feminist would just say that its because women are somehow held back or rejected by some mythical centuries old boys club that spans the globe or some shit. Or that a difference in interests are cruelly drilled into children at an early age, maliciously preventing women from entering traditionally male positions. Oh, except for the women that do enter them despite this gendered brainwashing that is supposedly taking place. Hard to explain that one away isn't it?

Why is it so hard a pill to swallow that women are inherently interested in different stuff than men? We accept these sorts of differences between the sexes in literally every other aspect of life, but not professions for some reason. Why is that?

I snipped the part you addressed to Shiranu.

First of all, I agree with you on that people -men or women- need to admit this issue is also about interests. But claiming that there is no hard condtioning from early age about fields of interests is also wrong. They are both black and white evaluations.

The idea that 'men and women are inherently interested in different stuff' because the nature of their genders is based on the traditional gender norms which also define males as,

-natural perpetrators
-prone to violence and commiting crimes by gender
-active and prone to take action
-disposable in every level of protection (individual, national)

females as

-natural victims
-natural care givers and car takers
-passive and needs to be taken care of and protected


This is not just incorrect but also wrong. These qualities, exactly like interests have nothing to do with gender, but what society approves or praises. For example, just because of this general understanding until a few decades ago women weren't even considered as potential serial killers or psyhcopaths while among all serial killer groups they make up the most efficient killers. But as the norms suggest women are generally the care givers and males are more violent than females, right? Wrong.

About early age conditioning, you can easily make an observation for yourself about the choices of toys offered to little girls and boys just by visiting a standard toy shop. Just walk around. Pay attention to the difference in colours and toy kits designed for girls and boys. You'll see it is nowhere near that vague or an empty accusation made up by feminists.

The important point is we do not have a much independence in shaping our interests and choices as we'd like to think, because we humans are nowhere near free as we think with our actions and choices in our lives. Among many different reasons and causes that shape our interests and choices, a very strong one is to be selected by the gender we are attracted to and fit in the norms that society approves. Strong, independent women with a good profession of any kind, let alone STEM are not the best group that get selected by mates. On the other hand women that fits in the traditional norms and occupations have a very high chance to get lucky in many levels. But you need to be pretty tough and competitive to be successful in the fields we are talking about and these women are naturally high maintenance AND do not fit the standard norm. (Highly intelligent and educated people are generally high maintenance, they also have high standards.)

Yes, speaking about it in ideal terms, why wouldn't everyone do what ever they want and owned up to it and be happy? Because at most times people act in the way to seek approval even they do not do it consciously.

A woman's intelligence is not often seen as her first quality. But her being a woman with that intelligence is. You cannot get rid off your gender or its desired physical qualities that you have or not doesn't matter how intelligent or talented you are at something. This the ugly truth. It is actually the main beef of every kind of feminism to begin with. And while it is about being a woman that is in contrast/against being male. That's the head of the monster. And the root of the desire to be evaluated free from that first unbreachable barrier of being seen as a woman first whatever you do.

Some of other dynamics are

-You people -also many feminists- expecting too much from this issue, because it is just a human life span away that women were kept away from science by law
-Their contributions weren't just taken granted, but there are even women who recieved nobel prize after they are dead, completely ignored/forgotten before outside pressure.
-When a woman accomplishes something or attempt to do something big, it is always first about how they look or how sexy they are or not.
-Has anyone ever asked or seen anyone asked a man how does he manage his kids with his work? I doubt it. When you are a woman, you are always under that threat and scrutiny.
-As women are in the minority in major leagues of works -not just STEM- they are always critcised more by other women and men. A competitive and tough woman who dedicates his life to his carrier is a 'frigid bitch', 'dragon lady'.
-Compared to men they need to put up a whole different levels of bullshit, men are not even aware that they exist.

These problems are real roblems women deal in every day life. Not made up stories by feminists as most men tend to think. Social media anger fueled by emotionally abusive propaganda is distracting people from real issues. With or withuot SJWs or MRAs or feminists these are real problems.

I guess it is natural for most men, -esp. young ones not to get this picture, because they are 'things' to live through or experience more than recognise in your environment about others. I am happy to say I know men from very different cultures that do though.


But unfortunately, it is never simple as 'women are not interested in STEM why can't we accept this'. Because if that was the case, gaining rights and freedom wouldn't result in rise of women stepping in to STEM fields, but simply going in one way, choosing easier paths. But that's not what they are doing, is it?