ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th March 2017, 11:50 AM   #41
Joe Random
Graduate Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,672
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I've known a few who did that and didn't even have children to take care of. It's simply a fact that men, on average, work more hours and more aggressively seek promotions. It doesn't mean that there's no discrimination or other problems to be solved, but it's important to understand the full picture.

One of previous times the 'wage gap' issue came up and the discussion turned to issues of choice in career path I threw myself out as an example of a male who prioritized things beyond raw gross pay. A few decades ago I was in IT, and that meant constant after-hours calls, continuous training, no such thing as "I'm off today", etc. I changed fields to something far more stable and regular. As a result my salary dropped by almost half, however I no longer had to worry about things like stopping in the middle of a meal because a server died, or not being able to go out of town to spend all that money I was earning because I had to be within a certain 'response range', etc. .

Even in the field I'm in now I could get hyper-aggressive with my approach to things and try to maneuver toward a higher paying track, but it would mean living at my desk more, and dreading the 'new message' alert tone on my phone 24x7, so I've not bothered. For me the trade off was more than worth it and to this day I'm thrilled I made the choice I did.

Some still felt that freely made choices such as the above were an issue if the end result was a negative impact on a woman's earnings. Certainly if women are choosing careers that prioritize flexible schedules or other benefits beyond salary, then it must be because of social expectations and therefore in need of correcting. Almost as if women lacked the agency and intelligence to do a cost/benefit analysis when it came to career choices they way men such as myself have done.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 11:52 AM   #42
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Thank you for your perspective on this, Joe.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:01 PM   #43
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,590
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
No, A'isha. I'm saying that it's an EARNINGS GAP, not a wage gap, AND that it's mainly CAUSED by choices that differ between the sexes.
For further detail on the earnings gap and how lifestyle choices affect it, heres some info from the UK:



"the gap varies over lifetime, and in some periods until aged 30 women earn 6.5% more than men"

"When looking at the differences for full-time employees, the gap is relatively small up to and including those aged 30 to 39 (with the exception of the 16 to 17 age group)," the ONS says. "In fact, in the 22 to 29 age group, women are paid on average slightly more than men."

The obvious trend in the chart is that once you hit your 30s, men start getting paid more. "From 40 upwards, the gap is much wider, with men being paid substantially more on average than women," the ONS says. The main reason: "This is likely to be connected with the fact that women who have children often take time out of the labour market."

It's not just that having kids hurts your earnings in later life, either. It's the work you choose to do, the ONS says. "It should be noted that the figures do not show differences in rates of pay for comparable jobs, as they are affected by factors such as the proportion of men and women in different occupations. For example, a higher proportion of women work in occupations such as administration and caring, that tend to offer lower salaries."

http://www.businessinsider.com/stati...16-3?r=UK&IR=T
Attached Images
File Type: jpg chartimage.png.jpg (18.2 KB, 6 views)
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:04 PM   #44
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
No, A'isha. I'm saying that it's an EARNINGS GAP, not a wage gap, AND that it's mainly CAUSED by choices that differ between the sexes.

Why is it so hard to understand?
A focus on hourly wages ignores the salaried women who are actually paid a lower salary and given lower and fewer raises.

Quote:
That has nothing to do with your gender, however.
Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because of my cancer? Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise if I had children (or they thought I would have children)?

Quote:
Depends: did you just take time off or was that medical leave? Medical leave is, typically, paid either by the employer or by the government or some program or another. I mean, you and I both know all this so I find your question puzzling.
It was both. As I said above, I used FMLA for my surgeries, but all the other time off I took for scans or doctor's appointments or just because the chemo had me so exhausted and sick I couldn't get out of bed came straight out of my available accrued sick time.
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:09 PM   #45
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,036
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
One of previous times the 'wage gap' issue came up and the discussion turned to issues of choice in career path I threw myself out as an example of a male who prioritized things beyond raw gross pay. A few decades ago I was in IT, and that meant constant after-hours calls, continuous training, no such thing as "I'm off today", etc. I changed fields to something far more stable and regular. As a result my salary dropped by almost half, however I no longer had to worry about things like stopping in the middle of a meal because a server died, or not being able to go out of town to spend all that money I was earning because I had to be within a certain 'response range', etc. .

Even in the field I'm in now I could get hyper-aggressive with my approach to things and try to maneuver toward a higher paying track, but it would mean living at my desk more, and dreading the 'new message' alert tone on my phone 24x7, so I've not bothered. For me the trade off was more than worth it and to this day I'm thrilled I made the choice I did.

Some still felt that freely made choices such as the above were an issue if the end result was a negative impact on a woman's earnings. Certainly if women are choosing careers that prioritize flexible schedules or other benefits beyond salary, then it must be because of social expectations and therefore in need of correcting. Almost as if women lacked the agency and intelligence to do a cost/benefit analysis when it came to career choices they way men such as myself have done.

Many feminists, including myself, have viewed the data and concluded that while a lot of it are what could be called voluntary career choices (and in many individual cases of course are), far too often these choices aren't really free choices because there are mechanisms to enforce those social expectations.

Furthermore, this subset of feminists has come around to the idea that one of the quickest and most effective ways to change this (the 'low hanging fruit' as it were) is to address theses consequences that men face. Do men have the option of doing as you did? Yes. In a great many cases are there social and economic consequences above what one chose to give up (punishments)? Yes. Again, not in every case, and the hardships of this generation are changing those things, but overall yes. My experience has been that while there are a lot of fringe, well, deplorable people, in both the feminist and MRA movements, the ones that actually have been getting things done for both men and women have mostly been those in the feminist one. This is despite my criticisms of many feminist communities that have left me less vocal in them than in the past. Hopefully that's changing too.

In short, the extent that these differences arise from natural differences in choices does not actually excuse or mitigate the remaining coercion that drive some of these choices. It's not either or, both are true.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:10 PM   #46
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
A focus on hourly wages ignores the salaried women who are actually paid a lower salary and given lower and fewer raises.
Ah, then we're talking about a different statistic entirely. Would you mind providing the numbers for this? Because the one that gets mentioned all the time is Sabrina's 77%, and that, we can agree, is not accurate based on the reasons I gave earlier, right?

Quote:
Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because of my cancer? Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise if I had children (or they thought I would have children)?
It's hard for me to give you an answer without further data, but solely based on your say-so I would say no. However, I'll remind you that we were talking about an earnings gap, which you insist hides a wage gap that we're yet to see evidence for.

Quote:
It was both. As I said above, I used FMLA for my surgeries, but all the other time off I took for scans or doctor's appointments or just because the chemo had me so exhausted and sick I couldn't get out of bed came straight out of my available accrued sick time.
I don't understand what the issue is, then. If I get sick and exceed my full-wage medical leave, I'd be paid less. Is this somehow unjust?
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:12 PM   #47
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,351
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Many feminists, including myself, have viewed the data and concluded that
pass
__________________
this space for rent
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:12 PM   #48
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Many feminists, including myself, have viewed the data and concluded that while a lot of it are what could be called voluntary career choices (and in many individual cases of course are), far too often these choices aren't really free choices because there are mechanisms to enforce those social expectations.
But is it a problem? Society sometimes creates expectations for people. That's life. We live with other people and this is the sort of dynamic that emerges from living in groups. We can try to change these tendencies but in the end there will always be some of them influencing our decisions. I don't think that's inherently bad.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:25 PM   #49
Sabrina
Wicked Lovely
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,541
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
For further detail on the earnings gap and how lifestyle choices affect it, heres some info from the UK:



"the gap varies over lifetime, and in some periods until aged 30 women earn 6.5% more than men"

"When looking at the differences for full-time employees, the gap is relatively small up to and including those aged 30 to 39 (with the exception of the 16 to 17 age group)," the ONS says. "In fact, in the 22 to 29 age group, women are paid on average slightly more than men."

The obvious trend in the chart is that once you hit your 30s, men start getting paid more. "From 40 upwards, the gap is much wider, with men being paid substantially more on average than women," the ONS says. The main reason: "This is likely to be connected with the fact that women who have children often take time out of the labour market."

It's not just that having kids hurts your earnings in later life, either. It's the work you choose to do, the ONS says. "It should be noted that the figures do not show differences in rates of pay for comparable jobs, as they are affected by factors such as the proportion of men and women in different occupations. For example, a higher proportion of women work in occupations such as administration and caring, that tend to offer lower salaries."

http://www.businessinsider.com/stati...16-3?r=UK&IR=T
That's in the UK though; we're talking about the United States. There are quite a few countries where women earn the same salaries as men do; the US just isn't one of them.

While this is merely my personal experience, I will offer up this example; I'm a 38 year old female working in a fully salaried full-time (forty hours per week) position with the title of Intelligence Analyst Sr (based on my approximately 15 years of experience). I know men who have less experience than I do that make a similar salary to what I do, and men who have the same amount of experience who make $5-10K more than I do. I'm single, have no children (unless you count my cat), own my own home, and live alone. So explain to me why I am making less than my male counterparts?

At least in the Army I got paid equal to what the men did; the government goes about it the right way at least. Every person, regardless of gender, gets paid based on their rank and years of experience, not their gender. It's only the private sector that has this issue.
__________________
"All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words: Freedom, Justice, Honor, Duty, Mercy, Hope."-Winston Churchill
"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is the right thing to do"-Justice Potter Stewart, US Supreme Court Justice 1915-1985.
Sabrina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:27 PM   #50
Sabrina
Wicked Lovely
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,541
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
But is it a problem? Society sometimes creates expectations for people. That's life. We live with other people and this is the sort of dynamic that emerges from living in groups. We can try to change these tendencies but in the end there will always be some of them influencing our decisions. I don't think that's inherently bad.
I wouldn't call it inherently bad, per se, but it's not good either. Just because society creates expectations for groups of people based on certain characteristics doesn't necessarily mean those expectations are just or right.
__________________
"All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words: Freedom, Justice, Honor, Duty, Mercy, Hope."-Winston Churchill
"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is the right thing to do"-Justice Potter Stewart, US Supreme Court Justice 1915-1985.
Sabrina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:27 PM   #51
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
While this is merely my personal experience, I will offer up this example; I'm a 38 year old female working in a fully salaried full-time (forty hours per week) position with the title of Intelligence Analyst Sr (based on my approximately 15 years of experience). I know men who have less experience than I do that make a similar salary to what I do, and men who have the same amount of experience who make $5-10K more than I do. I'm single, have no children (unless you count my cat), own my own home, and live alone. So explain to me why I am making less than my male counterparts?
Have you asked? It sure would beat making assumptions. And that's the issue I have with you and A'isha and others here: you jump to that conclusion, presumably because it fits your expectations. But is it true, and have you ways to find out?

Quote:
I wouldn't call it inherently bad, per se, but it's not good either. Just because society creates expectations for groups of people based on certain characteristics doesn't necessarily mean those expectations are just or right.
Yeah, so?
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:29 PM   #52
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,590
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
That's in the UK though; we're talking about the United States. There are quite a few countries where women earn the same salaries as men do; the US just isn't one of them.

While this is merely my personal experience, I will offer up this example; I'm a 38 year old female working in a fully salaried full-time (forty hours per week) position with the title of Intelligence Analyst Sr (based on my approximately 15 years of experience). I know men who have less experience than I do that make a similar salary to what I do, and men who have the same amount of experience who make $5-10K more than I do. I'm single, have no children (unless you count my cat), own my own home, and live alone. So explain to me why I am making less than my male counterparts?

At least in the Army I got paid equal to what the men did; the government goes about it the right way at least. Every person, regardless of gender, gets paid based on their rank and years of experience, not their gender. It's only the private sector that has this issue.
I offered it as (in my experience - corporate office worker) the UK and US are very similar. Also, the overall earnings gap (20ish percent) is about the same in each country. I figure that the information from the UK would also be broadly applicable to the USA.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:32 PM   #53
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I offered it as (in my experience - corporate office worker) the UK and US are very similar. Also, the overall earnings gap (20ish percent) is about the same in each country. I figure that the information from the UK would also be broadly applicable to the USA.
I'd figure it would be applicable to most of the western countries.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:47 PM   #54
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,062
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because of my cancer?

No, this was not a choice you made.

Quote:
Is it justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise if I had children (or they thought I would have children)?

Possibly, this is a choice you've made. Is the choice you made to have children going to mean you're going to spend less time at work when you;re scheduled to be at work? i.e. is it costing your employer money?
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 12:54 PM   #55
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 43,847
Anybody reading this thread would think salarity disparity was the whole and only point of the day. Planned Parenthood is being defunded. Laws are being passed requiring cemetery burial for fertilized eggs. The president boasts of getting away with sexual assault. Colleges cover up rapes to keep their sports programs profitable.

Eta: so I guess my point is, what the hell is going on? It's 2017 and we're moving backwards.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

Last edited by TragicMonkey; 8th March 2017 at 12:55 PM.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:00 PM   #56
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Anybody reading this thread would think salarity disparity was the whole and only point of the day.
If there is such a thing, then it should be solved. But the part of the conversation I participated in was about earnings disparity, which can have several other factors at play.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:17 PM   #57
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Ah, then we're talking about a different statistic entirely. Would you mind providing the numbers for this? Because the one that gets mentioned all the time is Sabrina's 77%, and that, we can agree, is not accurate based on the reasons I gave earlier, right?
I disagree, for the reasons I stated above. And here is a recent study about the raise issue.

Quote:
I don't understand what the issue is, then. If I get sick and exceed my full-wage medical leave, I'd be paid less. Is this somehow unjust?
Using up all your paid sick time and having to take unpaid time off isn't unjust. Being treated differently just for taking that paid time off (such as what 3point14 says below) is what, I'm arguing, is unjust.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No, this was not a choice you made.
Why is that relevant? I'm still costing my employer money (even more, actually, since like I said I've had to take more time off than the women who actually do have children).

And I note that the PTO does not come with a caveat "only okay to use if it's not for childcare reasons". FMLA explicitly doesn't.

Quote:
Possibly, this is a choice you've made. Is the choice you made to have children going to mean you're going to spend less time at work when you;re scheduled to be at work? i.e. is it costing your employer money?
If I'm treated the same regardless of what choice I make, because my employer thinks I might make a different choice later, then it's not really the result of my choices, is it?
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 8th March 2017 at 01:19 PM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:20 PM   #58
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
I disagree, for the reasons I stated above.
You disagree that the 77% is an earnings issue?

Quote:
And here is a recent study about the raise issue.
Thank you.

Quote:
Using up all your paid sick time and having to take unpaid time off isn't unjust. Being treated differently just for taking that paid time off is what, I'm arguing, is unjust.
Ok. Does it have anything to do with gender?
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:20 PM   #59
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 23,542
I'm not sure to whom this strike is directed. It doesn't seem to have a particularly clear message.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:25 PM   #60
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
You disagree that the 77% is an earnings issue?
I disagree that the link Sabrina posted is not accurate.

Quote:
Ok. Does it have anything to do with gender?
Yes.

EDIT: Not trying to be curt or sarcastic or anything, just typing on my phone)
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 8th March 2017 at 01:26 PM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:33 PM   #61
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,258
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
I'm not sure to whom this strike is directed. It doesn't seem to have a particularly clear message.
But I bet all those involved feel like they are doing real good. And seeing as feelings are the most important thing on the *********** planet in 2017 by their metric they are doing well.
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 01:53 PM   #62
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,907
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Lesser qualified men get promotions over fully qualified women all the time. This is news?
Certainly to some!!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 04:46 PM   #63
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
I disagree that the link Sabrina posted is not accurate.
You'll have to explain, because since Sabrina talked about a wage gap, and the figure is about yearly earnings instead, how is it accurate?

Quote:
Yes.
I'd like you to expand on that. You said that it was about being sick. What does it have to do with gender, then?
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 05:36 PM   #64
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,536
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Anybody reading this thread would think salarity disparity was the whole and only point of the day. Planned Parenthood is being defunded. Laws are being passed requiring cemetery burial for fertilized eggs. The president boasts of getting away with sexual assault. Colleges cover up rapes to keep their sports programs profitable.

Eta: so I guess my point is, what the hell is going on? It's 2017 and we're moving backwards.
Gish Gallop
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 05:57 PM   #65
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Are we done?
Is it safe?
Did the women come back?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 06:05 PM   #66
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
You'll have to explain, because since Sabrina talked about a wage gap, and the figure is about yearly earnings instead, how is it accurate?
Because for salaried employees, yearly earnings are our wage.

Quote:
I'd like you to expand on that. You said that it was about being sick. What does it have to do with gender, then?
Because some forms of "being sick" are less acceptable than others and apparently justify lower pay, and what forms these are seem to be the ones that affect women far more than men.

No one would even think of suggesting that I should be paid less for taking time off work because of my cancer, but if I had taken the time off to have and/or take care of a child instead, suddenly it's justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because "[I'm] going to spend less time at work when [I'm] scheduled to be at work" and "costing [my] employer money".
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 8th March 2017 at 06:07 PM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 06:10 PM   #67
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,258
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
Because for salaried employees, yearly earnings are our wage.



Because some forms of "being sick" are less acceptable than others and apparently justify lower pay, and what forms these are seem to be the ones that affect women far more than men.

No one would even think of suggesting that I should be paid less for taking time off work because of my cancer, but if I had taken the time off to have and/or take care of a child instead, suddenly it's justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because "[I'm] going to spend less time at work when [I'm] scheduled to be at work" and "costing [my] employer money".
When I tale off my clothes for my partner is acceptable but when i do it at Walmart I'm breaking the law.

Completly didn't things tend to have completely different reactions.
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 06:16 PM   #68
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
Because for salaried employees, yearly earnings are our wage.
You mean your wage is determined by the year, correct? Is that a significant percentage of the workforce in the US? I'd think most people are paid by the hour, and that's what most people mean when they say "wage". In fact, that's exactly the trick that feminists use when they bring it up.

Quote:
Because some forms of "being sick" are less acceptable than others and apparently justify lower pay, and what forms these are seem to be the ones that affect women far more than men.
I think that's a stretch, but without further clarification I'm unable to comment.

Quote:
No one would even think of suggesting that I should be paid less for taking time off work because of my cancer, but if I had taken the time off to have and/or take care of a child instead, suddenly it's justified for a company to lowball a salary offer to me or not give me a raise because "[I'm] going to spend less time at work when [I'm] scheduled to be at work" and "costing [my] employer money".
Another poster has already pointed out the difference, A'isha: choice.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 06:20 PM   #69
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 43,847
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
Gish Gallop
Me, or the salary disparity arguers? I really thought the day was supposed to be about a whole bunch of issues facing women. Maybe not. Okay, whatever. It's not like it worked, anyway. If I were a woman then the Red Equalist Sisterhood would destroy one bridge a night until legislatures stopped introducing anti-abortion bills, but I guess this day of skipping work and wearing red was just as good.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 07:45 PM   #70
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Another poster has already pointed out the difference, A'isha: choice.
And as I told that poster, it doesn't appear to be related to whichever choice women make at all.

EDIT: And I note that there's no discussion of "choice" to justify underpaying someone who takes a lot of sick time to, say, be treated for smoking-related COPD or something similar.
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 8th March 2017 at 08:48 PM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 08:27 PM   #71
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,311
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
And you base this assertion on... what, exactly?
Reading their interlocution over the years.
__________________
Credibility is not a boomerang. If you throw it away, it's not coming back.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2017, 08:38 PM   #72
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,311
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
I must here second Sabrina's curiosity about this. Please supply supporting material - flat accusations without such are pointless.
Is there anything you would accept as supporting material?
__________________
Credibility is not a boomerang. If you throw it away, it's not coming back.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 03:34 AM   #73
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
I note that there's no discussion of "choice" to justify underpaying someone who takes a lot of sick time to, say, be treated for smoking-related COPD or something similar.
Because choice is not involved: you need treatment or you'll die.

I'd also like you to answer my other request about salaried workers.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 04:48 AM   #74
Caper
Philosopher
 
Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,727
I have a scenario.

Suppose you have a large warehouse. Say it was a very successful business and employed 2000 workers all doing the same job, say picking and filling orders, some shipping and receiving, that kind of stuff. You hire 1000 men and 1000 women. You pay them all $15 an hour and because the company always needs extra help you allow them to work 40 to 100 hours a week. They can choose to stay late, come in extra days, work double shifts, whatever they want. As long as it is between 40 and 100 hours.

After 5 years, which group would you expect to have earned the most money? The men or women? If you took the top 100 earners, what percentage would you expect to be men vs women?
Caper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 05:32 AM   #75
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by Caper View Post
I have a scenario.

Suppose you have a large warehouse. Say it was a very successful business and employed 2000 workers all doing the same job, say picking and filling orders, some shipping and receiving, that kind of stuff. You hire 1000 men and 1000 women. You pay them all $15 an hour and because the company always needs extra help you allow them to work 40 to 100 hours a week. They can choose to stay late, come in extra days, work double shifts, whatever they want. As long as it is between 40 and 100 hours.

After 5 years, which group would you expect to have earned the most money? The men or women? If you took the top 100 earners, what percentage would you expect to be men vs women?
Whatever the result, I'm sure it'll be because of discrimination...
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 05:50 AM   #76
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Because choice is not involved: you need treatment or you'll die.
The "choice" in question is not the choice of whether to have treatment or not have treatment, it's used, in effect, to say "you chose to get yourself into the situation where you have to do this in the first place".

And even if it does mean merely "it's not a choice if you have to have treatment for it or die", then that certainly applies to taking time off for childbirth or childcare reason, too. My sister-in-law had pre-eclampsia, a pregnancy complication that's one of the main causes of death in childbirth, and no fewer than two women on my project had to take time off from work in the past month because their children had to be hospitalized for pneumonia.

Quote:
I'd also like you to answer my other request about salaried workers.
Because focusing on hourly pay doesn't accurately account for salaried workers, but yearly earnings includes both salaried and hourly (because for hourly workers, their yearly earnings are a reflection of not just what their hourly wage is, but also how many hours they're actually working).

Looking at weekly earnings seems to be the best way of comparing earnings between and among these two groups. But even then, a gap persists even when men and women work the same number of hours in a week.

Also notable is this:

"Median weekly earnings for mothers of children under age 18 ($722) were essentially the same as earnings for women without children under 18 ($718). Earnings for fathers with children under 18 were $966, compared with $817 for men without children under 18."

Women with children earn less than men without children...but so do women without children. And men with children out-earn them all. If the wage gap is all about having to take time off work because of their children, why is there still a gap between women who don't have children and men who don't have children, and why doesn't this affect men who have children?
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 9th March 2017 at 05:52 AM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 05:55 AM   #77
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
The "choice" in question is not the choice of whether to have treatment or not have treatment, it's used, in effect, to say "you chose to get yourself into the situation where you have to do this in the first place".
The thing is that you're substituting one definition of choice for the other. You're asking us why less pay for one reason is justified and why the other is not, and our answer is "choice". That's OUR answer, not the employer's.

Quote:
And even if it does mean merely "it's not a choice if you have to have treatment for it or die", then that certainly applies to taking time off for childbirth or childcare reason, too.
Absolutely, though in this day and age, you can pretty much decide when you're going to get pregnant.

Quote:
Because focusing on hourly pay doesn't accurately account for salaried workers, but yearly earnings includes both salaried and hourly (because for hourly workers, their yearly earnings are a reflection of not just what their hourly wage is, but also how many hours they're actually working).
No. That wasn't my question. My question was how many workers are paid by the year rather than by the hour.

Quote:
Looking at weekly earnings seems to be the best way of comparing earnings between and among these two groups.
Maybe, but then you can't say that you have a wage gap unless you actually compare wages.

Quote:
Women with children earn less than men without children...but so do women without children. And men with children out-earn them all. If the wage gap is all about women having to take time off work because of their children, why is there still a gap between women who don't have children and men who don't have children, and why doesn't this affect men who have children?
We've already discussed the different choices that men and women make. Before concluding that it must be discrimination, I'd like to at least eliminate this factor from your numbers.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 07:41 AM   #78
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
The thing is that you're substituting one definition of choice for the other.
You use the same definition of choice yourself later in your post!

Quote:
You're asking us why less pay for one reason is justified and why the other is not, and our answer is "choice". That's OUR answer, not the employer's.
I'm trying to find out why this answer is not given for things that are just as much the result of "choice", such as smoking-related COPD.

Quote:
Absolutely, though in this day and age, you can pretty much decide when you're going to get pregnant.
Just as you can decide when you're going to take up smoking.

You can't, however, decide when (or whether) you're going to get pre-eclampsia, or when (or whether) your child will get pneumonia bad enough to require hospitalization.

Quote:
No. That wasn't my question. My question was how many workers are paid by the year rather than by the hour.
According to the BLS report above, "Sixty-one percent of women and 56 percent of men employed in wage and salary jobs were paid by the hour in 2014."

Quote:
Maybe, but then you can't say that you have a wage gap unless you actually compare wages.
Which is what the weekly comparison does. Simply looking at hourly wage tells you nothing without knowing how many hours are worked in a week (or a year) compared to a salaried employee.

I mean, let's say I'm salaried and make $40,000 a year. You're hourly and make $20 an hour. Just given that information, can you determine which of us is paid more?

Quote:
We've already discussed the different choices that men and women make. Before concluding that it must be discrimination, I'd like to at least eliminate this factor from your numbers.
Considering that there's just as much of a gap between women without children and men without children as there is between women with children and men without children, the thesis that this gap is explained by women making decisions regarding childbirth and child care is inadequate, to say the least.
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 07:47 AM   #79
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,124
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
You use the same definition of choice yourself later in your post!
I don't follow.

Quote:
Just as you can decide when you're going to take up smoking.
Except that getting pregnant is something you do in order to have a baby. Having a baby, and all the things that come with that, are a direct, wanted, almost inevitable consequence of this. When you take up smoking it's not in order to get cancer, and only a certain percentage of smokers develop it. You're trying to make the two comparable but I don't see that you have a good argument for this.

Quote:
You can't, however, decide when (or whether) you're going to get pre-eclampsia, or when (or whether) your child will get pneumonia bad enough to require hospitalization.
Indeed. But wouldn't that fall under the "no choice" category we talked about earlier?

Quote:
According to the BLS report above, "Sixty-one percent of women and 56 percent of men employed in wage and salary jobs were paid by the hour in 2014."
Again, A'isha, this doesn't give me the whole picture. If someone is paid by the hour, telling me that they make less in a year than another person doesn't tell me if the other person is paid more by the hour. This is the criticism that I gave for the 77% figure being used as a "wage" gap argument.

Quote:
Which is what the weekly comparison does. Simply looking at hourly wage tells you nothing without knowing how many hours are worked in a week (or a year) compared to a salaried employee.

I mean, let's say I'm salaried and make $40,000 a year. You're hourly and make $20 an hour. Just given that information, can you determine which of us is paid more?
No, I can't. So the weekly comparison doesn't help unless you compare the same hours worked for the same work done in the same area by employees of the same employer. Not only do you have to compare apples with apples, but the apples have to be the same colour.

Quote:
Considering that there's just as much of a gap between women without children and men without children as there is between women with children and men without children, the thesis that this gap is explained by women making decisions regarding childbirth and child care is inadequate, to say the least.
Why is it inadequate? By what metric do you make this determination? It sounds a lot like it just feels wrong to you.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2017, 07:59 AM   #80
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,036
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
But is it a problem? Society sometimes creates expectations for people. That's life. We live with other people and this is the sort of dynamic that emerges from living in groups. We can try to change these tendencies but in the end there will always be some of them influencing our decisions. I don't think that's inherently bad.
Is it a problem? Yes of course it is. You're changing the resolution of the argument, and that changes the answer, but for the actual set under discussion, the answer seems very obvious. We aren't talking about 'social expectations' as a whole, but 'the way social expectations based completely on your gender are enforced'. Even if social expectations as a concept aren't inherently bad, that in no way means these ones are not bad or the way they're enforced is not.

Why are these ones problems? Well quite plainly it's a problem for many individuals who would like to do the things they're not 'supposed' to do, like be a female CEO just as valued as her peers or a part-time working male who lives with family helping take care of his grandmother. Not only will you not receive as much support as the other way, but you'll endure other rebuffs as well. Now, some write that completely off as 'whiny snowflakes hurt feelings', but, to put it mildly, screw those people. Also, this tendency to push people towards these different life choices based on something that matters realistically almost not at all for those purposes is that society is deprived of the best candidate for the activity who would provide the best labor. We're deprived of men who would rather spend more time being a good father and helping the PTA be effective because they're working overtime. We're deprived of talented and insightful female leaders and elected officials, because voters decided she should be raising children or supporting her husband. We're deprived of the labor of female scientists who might have brought insights into solving some of our most intractable problems because 'smart girls aren't cute'.

In short, it is a horrendous detriment to the efficient organization of labor. You know, in addition to being a ****** thing to do to individuals.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.