Gender Pay Gap

[tree_]

I'm arguing that if women wanted to return to work full time after child birth, they are not hindered by a social construct. Women absolutely have the power to make that choice.

[Green Habit]

Does this occur because of 'sex discrimination' or because couples come to this decision together, based on what they feel is the best choice? Breastfeeding is something only women can do and they feel a deeper connection to their babies than men, making it more difficult to spend time away in the early years.

Probably a little of both, as well as other factors. It's rare that you can pin down effects to one cause.

I certainly don't begrudge any family who makes the decision for a traditional household in which all parties are happy with that arrangement. But for women who want both a family and a professional career, they should have a man that's willing to sacrifice a bit on his end to make that happen.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[Green Habit]

Let the record show that Green Habit's nice graph was in one of the links I shared earlier.

Sorry man. With eight links thrown out there, there was no way that I was going to have the time to read all of them.

[tree_]

But for women who want both a family and a professional career, they should have a man that's willing to sacrifice a bit on his end to make that happen.

Agreed. And they have the rights and power to seek such a man before getting pregnant. I don't think men or constructs are holding women down. Based on the stats, I'd argue it's the scenario of choice for most women to focus on family while the husband continues to provide the majority of the financial support.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[Green Habit]

But for women who want both a family and a professional career, they should have a man that's willing to sacrifice a bit on his end to make that happen.

Agreed. And they have the rights and power to seek such a man before getting pregnant.

It's not always that simple. Some women have unplanned pregnancies. Others formed long term relationships long before having kids and then realized they had conflicting sensibilities of how to divvy up taking care of them. Others still may have broken up or divorced and are struggling to find a spouse that will allow them to balance work with family.

I don't think men or constructs are holding women down. Based on the stats, I'd argue it's the scenario of choice for most women to focus on family while the husband continues to provide the majority of the financial support.

I'm fine with ceding the possibility that more women than men are comfortable with becoming homemakers on their own volition. But even if there's a minority of women that aren't, their desires should be appropriately met too.

[tree_]

But for women who want both a family and a professional career, they should have a man that's willing to sacrifice a bit on his end to make that happen.

Agreed. And they have the rights and power to seek such a man before getting pregnant.

It's not always that simple. Some women have unplanned pregnancies. Others formed long term relationships long before having kids and then realized they had conflicting sensibilities of how to divvy up taking care of them. Others still may have broken up or divorced and are struggling to find a spouse that will allow them to balance work with family.

I don't think men or constructs are holding women down. Based on the stats, I'd argue it's the scenario of choice for most women to focus on family while the husband continues to provide the majority of the financial support.

I'm fine with ceding the possibility that more women than men are comfortable with becoming homemakers on their own volition. But even if there's a minority of women that aren't, their desires should be appropriately met too.

Surely, the struggling women you speak of don't make up the majority of the statistics. In this culture, women absolutely have every right and opportunity as men to choose their own paths.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

In this culture, women absolutely have every right and opportunity as men to choose their own paths.

Educate me, trag.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

In this culture, women absolutely have every right and opportunity as men to choose their own paths.

Educate me, trag.

For starters, there's this thing called pregnancy and childbirth...

Uh huh... what about it?

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

In this culture, women absolutely have every right and opportunity as men to choose their own paths.

Educate me, trag.

For starters, there's this thing called pregnancy and childbirth...

Uh huh... what about it?

They're not forced to get pregnant, are they? Sure, there's rape. But that's a small minority and it's mostly preventable. Also, in those cases, there's always abortion.

[---]

...you offered one paper that was not peer-reviewed and took a narrow focus as the best source of information; I offered multiple links that would offer a wide body of information because I believe that, in the absence of any sort of serious personal research in the matter, a wide body of work is a better source than a single white paper.

I don't care about your links regarding the legalities of setting up various types of corporations; they are entirely beside the point. The other links only summarized general facts about something that I've already acknowledged: that a wage gap between genders exists. None of them advance an explanation or attempt anything beyond breaking down and summarizing phenomena no one in this thread disputed.

Did you skip the part of my post where I referred to the literature review? You know, the part of the paper that sources all the peer-reviewed research this particular academic document is attempting to supplement? The same literature review that references published, peer-review research of similar findings with granular, industry-specific data, the sum of which represents a body of work at least as wide as the redundant "literature" to which you referred? Do I really have to hold your hand and outline how to consume academic research?

And for the record, yes, a single working paper from the NBER by five prominent academic economists is prima-facie more credible than anything that comes out of an organization whose mission is to "promote equity and education for women." You provide "research" whose aim is expressly political, I provide research whose aim is expressly academic.

I spoke to the legalities of setting up a corporation because it has baring on the topic. Corporations are required to have by-laws in place as part of their governing documents, and this is precisely where a corporation would define any sort of measures that may implement to offset the gender pay gap. Without specific language to that end, corporations have no obligation that precedes the maximization of profit.

Irrelevant. No one has argued that corporations don't both in theory and practice put profits ahead of all other considerations, including the way they hire, promote, and compensate.

My stance, as it relates not only to my wife but all the other intelligent women I'm fortunate to have in my life, is that the pay gap ultimately exists because of social/behavioral mechanisms that are demonstrated in the work place, not because of any corporate laws or economic instruments.

Okay, finally.

Specifically, what social and behavioral mechanisms are you referring to? Do you have any evidence beyond the one or two - or however many intelligent women you have in your life - data points that support your opinion? Why are these mechanisms better explanations of the wage gap than those that are offered in the theoretical and empirical literature on the topic?

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tree_]

I spoke to the legalities of setting up a corporation because it has baring on the topic. Corporations are required to have by-laws in place as part of their governing documents, and this is precisely where a corporation would define any sort of measures that may implement to offset the gender pay gap. Without specific language to that end, corporations have no obligation that precedes the maximization of profit.

Irrelevant. No one has argued that corporations don't both in theory and practice put profits ahead of all other considerations, including the way they hire, promote, and compensate.

Relevant if you believe laws are necessary for women to be paid the same as men. What a nightmare.

[---]

...you offered one paper that was not peer-reviewed and took a narrow focus as the best source of information; I offered multiple links that would offer a wide body of information because I believe that, in the absence of any sort of serious personal research in the matter, a wide body of work is a better source than a single white paper.

I don't care about your links regarding the legalities of setting up various types of corporations; they are entirely beside the point. The other links only summarized general facts about something that I've already acknowledged: that a wage gap between genders exists. None of them advance an explanation or attempt anything beyond breaking down and summarizing phenomena no one in this thread disputed.

Did you skip the part of my post where I referred to the literature review? You know, the part of the paper that sources all the peer-reviewed research this particular academic document is attempting to supplement? The same literature review that references published, peer-review research of similar findings with granular, industry-specific data, the sum of which represents a body of work at least as wide as the redundant "literature" to which you referred? Do I really have to hold your hand and outline how to consume academic research?

And for the record, yes, a single working paper from the NBER by five prominent academic economists is prima-facie more credible than anything that comes out of an organization whose mission is to "promote equity and education for women." You provide "research" whose aim is expressly political, I provide research whose aim is expressly academic.

I spoke to the legalities of setting up a corporation because it has baring on the topic. Corporations are required to have by-laws in place as part of their governing documents, and this is precisely where a corporation would define any sort of measures that may implement to offset the gender pay gap. Without specific language to that end, corporations have no obligation that precedes the maximization of profit.

Irrelevant. No one has argued that corporations don't both in theory and practice put profits ahead of all other considerations, including the way they hire, promote, and compensate.

My stance, as it relates not only to my wife but all the other intelligent women I'm fortunate to have in my life, is that the pay gap ultimately exists because of social/behavioral mechanisms that are demonstrated in the work place, not because of any corporate laws or economic instruments.

Okay, finally.

Specifically, what social and behavioral mechanisms are you referring to? Do you have any evidence beyond the one or two - or however many intelligent women you have in your life - data points that support your opinion? Why are these mechanisms better explanations of the wage gap than those that are offered in the theoretical and empirical literature on the topic?

Is this because I pooped on your power rankings thread?

No, lazy thinking and bad arguments just get my goat is all.

[---]

I spoke to the legalities of setting up a corporation because it has baring on the topic. Corporations are required to have by-laws in place as part of their governing documents, and this is precisely where a corporation would define any sort of measures that may implement to offset the gender pay gap. Without specific language to that end, corporations have no obligation that precedes the maximization of profit.

Irrelevant. No one has argued that corporations don't both in theory and practice put profits ahead of all other considerations, including the way they hire, promote, and compensate.

Relevant if you believe laws are necessary for women to be paid the same as men. What a nightmare.

Oh man we haven't even touched on how stupid "equal pay" laws are!

[tree_]

I spoke to the legalities of setting up a corporation because it has baring on the topic. Corporations are required to have by-laws in place as part of their governing documents, and this is precisely where a corporation would define any sort of measures that may implement to offset the gender pay gap. Without specific language to that end, corporations have no obligation that precedes the maximization of profit.

Irrelevant. No one has argued that corporations don't both in theory and practice put profits ahead of all other considerations, including the way they hire, promote, and compensate.

Relevant if you believe laws are necessary for women to be paid the same as men. What a nightmare.

Oh man we haven't even touched on how stupid "equal pay" laws are!

It's stupid to hear arguments such as these from the mouths of so-called feminists. Is this supposed to be empowering?