Feminists cite a statistic that says women make less money than men.

Does anyone work someplace, or know of a specific business that is paying their male workers more than the women workers?

Does the statistic erroneously count women who choose to get pregnant and not pursue executive positions?

Or does it suggest that women are oppressed in the workplace and are less actively pursuing upper management?

We've had this discussion before. And I'm pretty sure nobody has ever linked to a study that shows Women get paid the same (or better) regardless of how many factors you try to control for.

Further, the idea that people's anecdotal experiences are better than a study is silly.

So, I guess my question is, do you have a study that shows women get paid fairly?

And if so, then we can dive into the whole "women who choose to get pregnant and not pursue executive positions" line of thinking. But I suspect we'll never get there.

http://www.svensktnaringsliv.se/migr...6nestatistiken

So we've got a 10 year old study that the majority of us can't actually read. Ok...

What are the numbers they found? A quick look at the graphics still seems to show women paid less than men.

Are there any English studies that back this up?

Even before Sweden adopted feminism as their religion the same results could be found. This is from 1970-90 that shows that women werent discriminated back then either... Atleast not in the area of same pay for same work.

http://www.ifn.se/wfiles/reprints/xreprint436.pdf

Great! Could you post one of these that are in English.

I don't take methodology or conclusions at face value (especially when there are many other studies showing contradictory results). I have no idea who did or funded this study. And as much as I trust your representation of what it says... well I don't.

This is one of the american sources Eva Meyerson used

http://www.nap.edu/read/91/chapter/1

Actually found a version of the original article in english when looking for english sources.(You could also compare this to what i quoted with the help of google translate and maybe then apologize for implicitly calling me dishonest...)

http://www.ifn.se/wfiles/wp/wp470.pdf

It would also be nice of you to show the studies that says there is discrimination.

I'll take a look.

Sorry. I didn't actually mean that your translation was dishonest. More that I think you have a very clear bias here and studies / organizations that you feel are good/valid - I may think are quite lacking.

Aside from the question in OP, the second question that ruins the pay gap myth is this:

If businesses are so ruthlessly profit-seeking and women are just as economically productive as men, then why do they inflict an extra expense on themselves by employing more expensive men instead of cheaper, yet just-as-good women?

How can any man get a job when women are (regardless of whether or not they intend to), undercutting him?

Of course, there are other studies which show that women on average actually make more than men up to the age of 30 in the UK. These are conveniently ignored as well as they obviously don't fit the agenda.

lol Rasta. You've tried this approach a half dozen times already. And every time we point out the same reason your point is stupid. Two big reasons:

1. Businesses aren't ruthlessly profit-seeking. A business owner may be happy to make a certain minimum profit and then sacrifice some additional profit to work with people that don't absolutely maximize his profit.

2. Many hiring decisions are made by people that have absolutely no incentive to increase the bottom line.

You can't be this stupid. First, there is the false premise of rational actors.

All of that is pretty much correct. The thing that is lacking is those few businesses that are ruthlessly profit seeking and that have the incentive to increase the bottom line. Its in those cutting edge businesses that the trend would start if you actually could pay women less for the same work and that would spiral into other companies mimicking the result of the innovators leaving alot of men without jobs.

Maybe ruthlessly profit-seeking companies are a myth.

You know, like a hyper-logical men's rights advocate.

Grainy study from before I was born.. Totally worth reading.

The wage gap is real but appears to be shrinking.

Young college educated women make about 96% of what their male counterparts earn. This difference seems so small that it can likely be chalked up to coincidence.

Women at the top of their field actually make more than men in similar positions, but the data used to draw this conclusion is probably insufficient.

Afaik, the women who are hurt the most are those who didn't finish college and those who take a significant amount of time off for family and other stuff.

Yeah, no it wouldn't.

Further, the legal costs of blatantly seeking to pay women less would more than offset any potential benefit.

Ruthlessly profit seeking also doesn't mean rationally profit seeking.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gend..._United_States

Why don't you guys read through this to start. It contains links to studies in English and completed this century. Pay particular attention to the explained vs unexplained aspect of the pay gap.

This plus the possibility that a ruthless profit-seeking firm might discriminate based on the perceived value of women's labour; an ignorant manager hiring for a profit-seeking firm, even when he has the company's bottom line in his self-interest, can still discriminate.

I would lol at the fact that I learnt the mechanics of labour discrimination in an intro micro class, but of course that's not the problem. Rasta is just looking for any 'logical' argument that will support his already solidified opinion.

When has it ever been proven that the reason women make less is because of discrimination?

Did you read the wiki article?

I mean, sure I suppose it's not impossible that it's not discrimination but instead some unknown factor. But it seems unlikely - and even if it is true we should probably still care and try to eliminate it.

Rasta, I'm a bit curious though. Do you have like an anti-women alert set up or do you just lurk the forum regularly without posting?

In the middle of it now, your post wasn't loaded until I posted.

For every cat-calling, mysoginistic douche, there is a woman pretending to be sweet for a man to manipulate him into doing whatever she wants.

But no one really talks about that.

Lol. This might have set the record for fastest 'I'm just asking questions' to full fledged wackiness.

I mean you're suppose to go a few more rounds of 'But what about this study?' Or 'isn't it true that getting pregnant is all the fault of the women?'