'The Gender Pay Gap' - "Unmarried women earn only 56 cents for every dollar married men earn"

[Breeze54]

http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=7707&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">The Gender Pay Gap

Jul 30, 2008

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy signed the http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8024&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">Equal Pay Act (EPA) into law, making it illegal for employers to pay unequal wages to men and women who perform equal work. At the time, http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8025&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">women earned 59 cents to every dollar earned by men. Today, a pay gap persists, as women earn 77 cents to every dollar that men earn. The Institute of Women's Policy Research found that this wage disparity will cost women anywhere from http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8027&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">$400,000 to $2 million over a lifetime in lost wages.
An April Senate report found that in contrast to previous slowdowns, the current economic downturn http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8028&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">"is hitting women harder than men. They are suffering more job losses and larger reductions in wages than the general population." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) have introduced the Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA), which will strengthen current laws against wage discrimination. The bill passed the House Education And Labor Committee last week and is scheduled to come to a floor vote later this week. As DeLauro urged, "The marketplace alone will not correct this injustice -- that is why we need a http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8029&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">legislative solution."

UNACCEPTABLE STATUS QUO:

While the wage gap has narrowed throughout the 20th century, gender-based financial disparities between are, in many cases, growing. Unmarried women, for example, http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8030&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">earn only 56 cents for every dollar that married men make. In the last year, the unemployment rate among adult women workers increased 20 percent, in contrast to a 17 percent increase among adult men. As women get older, the wage gap broadens: females aged 45 to 64 earn only 71 percent of what men earn, a pain exacerbated by the necessity to prepare for retirement. In the current subprime crisis, despite their better overall credit scores, women are over 30 percent more likely to have expensive subprime loans and are at greater risk of facing foreclosure. Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) noted, "Between 1963 and now, the wage gap has narrowed by less than half a cent a year. At this rate, it would take about another 50 years before men and women reach parity in pay in this country." Currently, there is not a single state in which women have gained pay equality with men.

RESTORING EQUALITY:

http://www.pay-equity.org/info-leg.html">The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338 and S.766) would "close loopholes that have http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8035&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">allowed employers to avoid responsibility for discriminatory pay" and strengthen accountability in the workplace. The legislation increases penalties for sex discrimination in pay unless the company has a business-related reason for the inequality in wages. The PFA puts gender discrimination sanctions on equal footing with other forms of wage discrimination ­ such as those based on race, disability, or age, allowing women to file lawsuits for compensatory and punitive damages. The bill also prohibits employers retaliating against employees who share salary information with their co-workers. The legislation also strengthens http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8036&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">opportunities for women. The Act requires that the Department of Labor "improve outreach and training efforts to work with employers in order to eliminate pay disparities" and "creates a new grant program to help strengthen the negotiation skills of girls and women."

STALLING EQUALITY EFFORTS:

Failing to note the http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/04/why_would.html?elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">persistent inequalities between men and women, congressional conservatives claim the Paycheck Fairness Act is "unnecessary" because the Equal Pay Act "already makes wage discrimination illegal" and complain about "increased litigation costs." Conservatives seem to be worried about employers being required to pay women a fair wage, but PFA simply closes loopholes in existing law so that http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8035&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">fair pay laws can be better enforced. Furthermore, conservatives' record on equal pay is dismal. The PFA received its first hearing in 2007 -- after progressive captured Congress -- while the legislation sat in conservative-controlled Congress for a decade. While the bill enjoys the support of http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8038&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">230 House co-sponsors and 22 Senate co-sponsors, conservatives have consistently mounted vigorous efforts to stall equal pay legislation. In April, Senate conservatives blocked cloture on the http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/04/why_would.html?elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which would have rectified the Supreme Court decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear "that made it much harder for women and other workers to pursue pay discrimination claims." http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=8040&elq=FB1B654BAB474B549A1894973DB07737">Labor Secretary Elaine Chao has recommended that President Bush veto the PFA.

http://www.pay-equity.org/PDFs/PaycheckFairnessAct_2007.pdf">Paycheck Fairness Act Fact Sheet (pdf)

:(

[Warpy]

1. That's one way they sucker us into marriage

and once married, since the pay gap persists, they use it to push all the unpaid shitwork onto our backs.

I'm told that younger men are doing more of the shitwork. All I know is that they sure as hell wouldn't lower themselves to do much of it when I was among the married, often citing their superior financial contribution as a justification.

[Breeze54]

6. That's the CONservative plan.... see below...

Fair Pay is a Better Way

By Jessica Arons, Alexandra Cawthorne | April 25, 2008

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/04/why_would.html

snip-->

Just last week, a consortium of conservative “marriage movement” groups issued a report claiming that unwed childbearing, and divorced women cost taxpayers billions of dollars each year. Based on research that showed marriage would lift approximately 60 percent of female-headed households out of poverty, the groups concluded that an increased marriage rate would reduce poor women and their children’s need for and use of public benefit programs—not to mention their eligibility for such programs.

What the report failed to examine is why marriage would be more of an economic boon to women than men in the first place. Perhaps it has something to do with pay discrimination. The average woman earns 77 cents for every dollar the average man makes, and http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/pdf/single_women.pdf">unmarried women earn even less—only 56 cents for every dollar that married men make. If women were paid fair wages for equal work, then maybe they wouldn’t need to get married just to stay afloat in today’s economy.

more....

[AngryAmish]

8. My point is married and unmarried people are different

I worked less when I was married. I work more now. That is a single data point and that means nothing.

However, high earning men tend to get married earlier and stay married. High earners work a lot more. So for the comparison to be be apt one must control for profession, hours worked, experience and a host of other factors. Otherwise it is garbage economics.

[Breeze54]

9. Link? What part of EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK, do you NOT understand?!?

You sound guilty. Stop spewing your opinion and help fix this! :grr:

[AngryAmish]

10. I am not sure what you are saying

Do you want links proving married and unmarrieds are different? Granted, I am not showing the research about employment participation, et al between the sexes and the folks in relationships. For that, you have to take my word (or not - this is a free country and since I'm not showing my work you have every right to be skeptical).

So you want me to help fix what? A pay gap that may or may not exist? Based on what was posted above and the demonstrably inapt inapt comparison between unmarried women and married men I am unsure there is a problem to fix.

[Breeze54]

12. Write to your congress critter and your senators and tell them to vote YES on PFA!

You seem to keep talking about the differences (IYO) of education, etc. but you don't back that up with any links to support your argument. I provided a ton of links to articles and studies that show the pay gap! Women, married or not, should be getting equal pay for equal work and this bill could make that happen. Call your Reps and demand they vote yes on PFA!

[supernova]

14. The pay gap is real

It is nothing to do with creative statistics. And yes, they do account for differences in age, education, experience levels, all of that is accounted for.

The pay gap has been a well-documented fact ever since they started following it, and it's only slightly younger than I am (46).

It is indeed distressing that since the women's movement of the late 60s and 70s, we are WORSE off, not better.

[fed_up_mother]

21. MUCH of the pay gap can be explained by causes other than sexism

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/series8.aspx

According to the above article the American Association of University Women believes that less than a quarter of the pay gap "may" be attributed to sexism. I think it is, but I also think that most of the pay gap is attributed to personal choices.

We'd be much better of lobbying for better family leave for both sexes Women miss more work due to childbirth and childrearing, and it affects our earnings over a lifetime.

quote from article below:

On its face, the evidence in the AAUW study looks damning. "One year out of college," it says, "women working full-time earn only 80 percent as much as their male colleagues earn. Ten years after graduation, women fall farther behind, earning only 69 percent as much as men earn."

But read more, and you learn things that don't get much notice on Equal Pay Day. As the report acknowledges, women with college degrees tend to go into fields like education, psychology and the humanities, which typically pay less than the sectors preferred by men, such as engineering, math and business. They are also more likely than men to work for nonprofit groups and local governments, which do not offer salaries that Alex Rodriguez would envy.

As they get older, many women elect to work less so they can spend time with their children. A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men. When these mothers return to full-time jobs, they naturally earn less than they would have if they had never left.

Even before they have kids, men and women often do different things that may affect earnings. A year out of college, notes AAUW, women in full-time jobs work an average of 42 hours a week, compared to 45 for men. Men are also far more likely to work more than 50 hours a week.

Buried in the report is a startling admission: "After accounting for all factors known to affect wages, about one-quarter of the gap remains unexplained and may be attributed to discrimination" (my emphasis). Another way to put it is that three-quarters of the gap clearly has innocent causes -- and that we actually don't know whether discrimination accounts for the rest."

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fed_up_mother]

27. Can you read? The AAUW is NOT a conservative group.

Do your own damn research. I've done my research, and am not going up in flames about something that is supposed to get me all riled up, but isn't accounting for the whole picture. I don't drink the kool aid from anyone, but prefer to form my own opinion FROM FACTS.

There is still discrimination, but the main factor is career and lifestyle choices - choices often dictated by childrearing. We'd make better headway on equal pay with better sick leave, child leave, maternity leave, etc. and when men start picking up the slack at home.

[Breeze54]

28. "Do your own damn research." .. LOL-- I posted STUDIES in the OP.... you ignore them.

You know, studies based on FACTS!?!

get a clue.

[fed_up_mother]

31. You mean the bogus study comparing married men to single women?

That wasn't a "study," that was someone looking to support an already drawn conclusion.

That kind of study is completely laughable, and does nothing to further women's causes among people who think instead of just getting angry.

[Breeze54]

33. LOL!! Are you a man?

:shrug:

[fed_up_mother]

35. It's a shame you think I'm a man because I can see through a flawed study

Really goes to show how far women actually have to go, doesn't it? :)

[Breeze54]

38. Certainly shows how far you have to go... like out of the 50's!!

:eyes:

[fed_up_mother]

41. SO you really think that's a legitimate study?

It's not. If you want to discuss the point of the article, it's an absurd study.

On the other hand, the AAUW study was quite comprehensive, even if they did tend to publicize the parts of their study that showed gender bias in the workplace, and downplayed the other aspects.

Like I said, we will move ahead with better childcare, paid leave, sick leave, caretaker leave, when men pick up the slack at home, and when women take jobs that are comparably as miserable and dangerous as some jobs that "mostly" men do.

Those are all liberal points of view, by the way. I just don't believe in bogus studies to make a case. Sorry.

[Breeze54]

55. You have your head in the sand. It's a pity.

:eyes:

I'll bet you wear frilly, girly, flouncy dresses too and have hot pink nails and big hair! :eyes:

[fed_up_mother]

59. That is so far from me. ROFLMAO

Although I do have peachy colored toenails right now :) Hell, I didn't even wear flouncy dresses as a child. My mother thought they were ridiculous.

By the way, your personal attacks are so - well - catty.

...

...

...

...

:rofl:

[riverdeep]

83. I applaud you for trying to throw an alternate viewpoint in the face of vitriol.

As if our opponents haven't already thought of the arguments your critics are making. Of course they have, and they're ready and able to shoot them down. That's why we need to be hardest on our own beliefs before someone else has a chance to.

However, there IS something at play here. This country never came to terms with women in the workforce. For women in the workforce to be truly successful, society as a whole would have to change radically to accommodate the shift. This is what happened in Scandinavian countries. Workplaces were changed to accommodate working mothers including onsite daycare, paternal and maternal leave (6 months or longer in some countries, fully paid), flextime worked out among employees, a general lack of discrimination in hiring, etc. As a result, the entire nation is happier and more productive. Here, we grudgingly took in women and attempted to change as little as possible, forcing individual women to do the changing. We didn't look at the collective impact.

Also, it's well known that once women start entering professions en masse, there is a 'ghettoization' effect that takes place. Teaching used to be a largely male profession. Then it was considered a respectable profession that paid relatively well. As women started entering in greater numbers, status and pay went down. It happens with most professions. Did teaching suddenly become less valuable in this capitalist society?

So while what you're saying is true after the fact (of women entering the workplace), there are things to consider that take place before the fact (when society makes its choices about how to allocate and structure its resources).

[Breeze54]

32. "I don't drink the kool aid" ~fed_up_mother~ -- LMAO! Oh, you're drinking LOTS of RED Koolaid!

[fed_up_mother]

36. Still won't address the merits of AAUW study, will you?

You know, those fine details?

[Breeze54]

39. You want to sling shit on women and the Fair Pay Act? Why?

What's your agenda?

[fed_up_mother]

44. My agenda? Truth. Truth tends to get us farther in the long run

There's still sexism in the workplace, but it's the "other" factors that the government needs to help with - which I won't bother repeating again - which will help advance women in the workplace.

Government childcare will do more to advance women in the workforce than a hundred bills like this. This might rile up the base, and make feminists angry, but it's like beating a dead horse, imo. We need real, practical solutions, and there are a number of things that can be done to create a more egalitarian society. When that happens, we'll be much closer to equal pay.

[Breeze54]

47. Wow! So you think women SHOULD be discriminated against? Good Info. to know!!

Why do you hate women? :shrug:

[fed_up_mother]

51. Did I say women should be discriminated against?

Do you always make such outrageous claims when someone points out the flaws in your arguments?

DId I even say I was against the bill? No, I said there's other things we need to accomplish before we achieve our goal.

But, use some bogus studies to fuel your anger. If that makes you feel better as a woman, go ahead. Personally, I know I'm smarter than that.

[Breeze54]

53. Ummmm... yes, you did, in not so many words. Why do you hate women? n/t

[fed_up_mother]

61. I love women.

I just hate it when women use bogus studies to promote feminism. It makes us look STUPID.

[Breeze54]

64. So you're calling Hillary Clinton, Rosa DeLauro,Tom Harkin & Eleanor Norton liars?

Hmmm... well, I don't want re-open the HRC can of worms from the primaries but I seriously doubt Rep. Rosa DeLauro
is lying or Tom Harkin and Eleanor Norton nor do I believe that American Progress is lying either. Perhaps it's a good
thing you signed up at DU. You have a lot to learn.

Maybe you should actually explore this site? http://www.pay-equity.org/info-leg.html

[Common Sense Party]

80. ...

"Do you always make such outrageous claims when someone points out the flaws in your arguments?"

Yes, quite often. I hope you weren't expecting a rational, civil, fact-based debate.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Common Sense Party]

85. Mmmmm! I love pizza! Are you buying?

Progressive ideals I like. Bullshit arguments and hysterical name-calling leave me cold.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

24. Every one of the factors explained away as not sexism, ARE sexism!

As the report acknowledges, women with college degrees tend to go into fields like education, psychology and the humanities, which typically pay less than the sectors preferred by men, such as engineering, math and business. They are also more likely than men to work for nonprofit groups and local governments, which do not offer salaries that Alex Rodriguez would envy.

WHY do those fields pay less? Because, duh, more women are in them!

As they get older, many women elect to work less so they can spend time with their children. A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men. When these mothers return to full-time jobs, they naturally earn less than they would have if they had never left.

Even before they have kids, men and women often do different things that may affect earnings. A year out of college, notes AAUW, women in full-time jobs work an average of 42 hours a week, compared to 45 for men. Men are also far more likely to work more than 50 hours a week.

Why? Because, duh, sexism!

Don't let the patriarchy define the terms for you!

[fed_up_mother]

30. And what is the government supposed to do about some of that?

Nothing. It's not the government's job to make a woman's husband pick up the slack. It is the government's job, imo, as I've stated before, to pass laws to give better childcare, maternity leave, sick leave, caregiver leave, etc. However, in the end it's up to us to make our relationships more egalitarian. The government can't do that for us.

And one thing that's not even mentioned is the danger factor. Men make more in many jobs because they take more dangerous or physically demanding jobs - therefore, a college educated woman might not make as much as a man with less education.

You might think a secretary should earn as much as a welder, but why? Why shouldn't more women become welders? Because it's dirty, hot, and hard work (at least, the particular jobs I'm thinking about.) I'm only giving that example because I know a woman (college educated) who worked for the same company as her husband in Louisiana, and he earned more than she did. However, she was free to apply for the welder's job. She didn't want it, though.

Yeah, there's sexism, but the statistics bantered about, just don't explain the whole picture.

[Breeze54]

37. More Kool Aid spewing..."Men work HARDER..."

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

You are Sooooooooo OWNED!!!!

[fed_up_mother]

46. Men take more dangerous jobs. If you can't live with that fact, so be it.

The guys who pick up my trash make a pretty decent salary considering their education level. Why don't women apply for that job?

EMPLOYER discrimination only applies to a fraction of the difference in pay. When we have a more egalitarian society in general, we'll make better pay, but we need to make a lot more changes for that to happen, and I'm tired of repeating those things.

[Breeze54]

49. Really?! How do you account for women in combat zones and being blown up?

ALL women don't take dangerous type jobs? :wow: I didn't know that. :sarcasm:

Does that include female truck drivers, female electricians, heavy equipment operators,
police women, fire women, female soldiers, cellphone tower repair women, just to name a few?!

Please.... enlighten us all!! :eyes:

[fed_up_mother]

54. That doesn't even deserve a reply. I never came close to saying that

Those women who are doing those jobs deserve the same pay as men, but there's not as many women doing those jobs - is there? THAT affects pay comparisons.

Geesh

[Breeze54]

57. OH!! So women doing the SAME Jobs as Men, DO deserve the SAME pay?!?

We're making progress with you!! :applause: :applause:

[fed_up_mother]

63. SHIT! I said the study was bogus, and you decided I don't believe in

equal pay? Man... (my apologies to men, women, or whomever)

That's some leap! If I told you how many daughters I have, you'd accuse me of overpopulating the world. (Although, truth be told, some are adopted.)

You can be damn sure I believe in equal pay. Would you ever read what I've written?

Government childcare
Universal healthcare
Mass transit
Sick leave
Caretaker leave
Maternity/adoption leave

All of those things will go FAR in enabling women to come closer to parity to men. I just don't think that the huge gap that exists now is mostly due to employer discrimination. I believe there's a lot of evidence to show that only a fraction of the disparity is due to actual discrimination. And, yes, I do believe that studies like that of the AAUW show that.

[Breeze54]

67. Sorry but pay equity has nothing to do with your TO DO list, BEFORE women get equal pay!!

NOT ALL WOMEN HAVE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!

Not all women have YOUNG CHILDREN!!!!

Or maybe you didn't realize that fact?

:shrug:

[fed_up_mother]

73. But they account for a large part of the pay disparity

Only a portion of it is due to actual discrimination. We need to work on the other things to.

[Breeze54]

77. Then you didn't read my OP.... women 40 to 68 are also shafted.

:grr:

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

43. GMAB on the "danger"

Here's an interestiing fact: Did you know that more women die in childbirth in the US than all workplace deaths combined?

Maternal mortality rate "13.1 deaths per 100,000 live births"

Workplace death rates - "In 2006, the death rate for Hispanics was 5 per 100,000 workers, compared with 4 per 100,000 for all workers, 4 per 100,000 for non-Hispanic whites and 3.7 per 100,000 for non-Hispanic blacks, the CDC said."

Pretty amazing, especially when you consider that some of the workplace deaths are women. It appears just being a female carries with it the highest occupational hazard.

At any rate, I notice that most of the guys who pull that "men do the most dangerous jobs therefore we should ALL get paid more" crap are usually in pretty safe jobs. Fine, pay the people (of whatever gender) who do truly dangerous jobs a premium for them but don't try and tell me that the schlub in the cube next to me deserves more pay because some of his male counterparts are loggers. The vast majority of jobs in this country are not terribly dangerous, and the dangers they do entail effect men and women equally.

[fed_up_mother]

50. So, how many women are picking up your trash?

The men who are picking up my trash are making more than the women at the check out counters at the mall.

And, personally, I think that's fair, but then, I'm in favor of capitalism (with strong regulations) who happens to have socialist leanings - adequate daycare for all, singlepayer healthcare, "free" higher education, etc, more mass transit, etc. etc.

[Breeze54]

52. LMAO!! Trash truck drivers with the hydrolic lifts? Answer my question above!

:rofl: :rofl:

[fed_up_mother]

56. No hydrolic lift is picking up my garbage cans. Where do you live to have

such advanced technology? Inquiring minds want to know? :)

[Breeze54]

62. In the "librul" North East ! We have 'technology'... even.

I haven't seen one garbage man pick up a trash can in years, although I live in a condo, so we have dumpsters at the rear of the building. No trash cans.. They use hydrolic lifts here. Although that's just my town. Some other towns have trash people, male AND FEMALE, that actually pick up the trash cans. Depends on where you live. We also have recycling trucks that pick up items (literally) to be recycled. Modern technology is a gas! :P

[fed_up_mother]

65. We have hydrolic lifts for dumpsters, but not for trash cans that I put out

And, no, I've never seen a woman doing that job around here. Frankly, I don't know how the men do it without having a heat stroke. (I live in a major city near the Gulf Coast.)

[mrreowwr_kittty]

66. Here in hot-as-hell Phoenix, I've never seen a sanitation worker exit the truck.

If you don't put your recepticle far enough out on the curb or there's a car in front of it, they leave it there. Not that I blame them. They have REALLY big mechanical arms for emptying the dumpsters.

[Breeze54]

68. Exactly and they use those arms to PU trash cans too!

And the people that do actually PU the trash cans don't seem
to mind at all, hell, they're UNION and make bookoo bucks!

[fed_up_mother]

72. Yeah, they do, so more women should apply for those jobs!

[Breeze54]

76. Better yet? The companies should hire the women that already applied for those jobs!

;)

And hire more!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

58. The men who pick up the trash in front of my house are sitting in comfortable trucks

And using a mechanical arm. The women who pick up the trash in the offices I work in are doing it by hand. BTW, the women who work those checkout counters at the mall bust their asses. When they're not ringing you up they are expected to be putting stock back or helping customers. They also have to deal with every snotty asswipe who thinks it's appropriate to take their frustrations out on service people. So you really think trash truck guy has it harder?

Oh, and the people who do the truly most horrific jobs are NOT being paid well. They are the men AND women who break their backs picking produce, or toiling in disgusting and dangerous meatpacking plants. They are the men who bake in the hot sun at construction sites and the women who work their fingers to the bone in sweatshops. Hate to disturb your romantic illusions about gallant men sparing the delicate wimmenz from shitty work but that just ain't the way it is.

[Breeze54]

69. "delicate wimmenz"

:rofl: :rofl:

[fed_up_mother]

71. I know the kind of hard work women do

And many of those women are picking our produce while PREGNANT. However, I don't think the men and women picking our produce are greatly affecting the wage disparity in this country, but I could be wrong about that.

As far as the trash pick up around here, I don't think too many women could pick up my trash cans. At least not little, fragile women like me. :sarcasm:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

74. Assuming you live in some locale where trashcans are picked up by hand

I doubt most men could pick them up either. But that won't stop them from whining about how they DESERVE to be paid more than you do because a few other men are picking up heavy trashcans. Apparently, you still don't get my point. I've never given birth to a baby, but I don't insist on being paid more because twice as many women die in childbirth as men die on the job.

IOW, the whole "men do more dangerous jobs!" thing is a strawman and a canard.

[Withywindle]

91. I think that fact should be shouted from the rooftops constantly.

Kind of off-topic, but I'm sick of arguing with "pro-life Dems" who act like deciding whether or not to give birth is some kind of convenience or fashion issue.

Excuse me - even with modern medicine, EVERY WOMAN WHO GIVES BIRTH IS RISKING HER LIFE. I'm shouting in caps because it merits it.

Damn bloody straight no woman should ever have to take that risk unless she wants it with all her heart. I'm against forced birth for women for the exact same reason I'm against the draft for men (Or anyone).

[Marnieworld]

89. profit producing careers pay more

It's a question of math.

The other two paragraphs you quoted and then just say sexism. How is it sexist to state facts? Are they lying that women leave the workforce or work less hours? Or is it sexist that those things valuable to an employer, time spent working, years accumulating experience, are considered more valuable than less work and less experience?

[Marnieworld]

88. Thanks for this post

I think of these factors whenever there are all of these cries about pay inequality and sexism. There is some work left to do on the sexism front but to not even consider the impact of choosing to have children can have on a career is disingenuous. The statistic above, " A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men" explains it all. Where are the studies that compare men and women without children? Whenever I've seen them the pay is almost if not equal.

[Withywindle]

92. self-delete: dupe-a-roonie.

[Withywindle]

93. I agree; the question, why does the burden of raising a family fall disproportionately on women?

If I were to imagine myself as a business owner or manager (I'm not), it really does just seem like common sense that of course I would be less likely to promote someone who took a lot of time off. I DO think hard work ought to be rewarded, and, as Woody Allen (I think) said, "90% of life is showing up." So if I'm the boss, of course I'm going to hand out the limited raises and promotions to those who, well, show up.

A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time

See, AS A WOMAN, I find that fucking shameful. How many of those 39 percent willingly accepted scholarship money--with the implicit hope that they'd find a way to use that education for the benefit of the WHOLE human race, not just their direct DNA analogues--and took a spot from someone who was actually maybe interested in, I don't know, devoting their lives to *advancement* of the whole culture, not just the inside of their minivan and McMansion?


(Disclaimer: I don't have kids, don't want to. Whenever someone says to me, "But maybe your kids could've cured cancer" I think, "Well, maybe cancer could've been cured 20 years ago by someone who had the smarts and the education but decided to be a SAHM instead of being in that 'stressful' research rat race. Hell, odds are, your parents hoped that about YOU." But they didn't put in the lab time and neither did you.)

[Hidden Stillness]

90. You NEVER Cite the Actual Study, and Do Not Describe It Correctly

Your whole presentation on this thread has been so completely dishonest and fraudulent, I hardly know where to start, but let us start with a typical stunt committed by liars of your ilk, and that is that you quote a study by a respected group, then do not direct the reader to that group or its website (the American Association of University Women), but to some silly thing that also gave us (your thread contribution) "Obama's Global Tax," which I still do not understand at all, it is so fucking stupid. "Investor's Business Daily" "Editorial"?? Gee, they are against the AAUW study findings? I'm shocked. You should quote Goodyear about the Ledbetter case, or Wal Mart about Obama and unions.

I actually read the AAUW study, and it is nothing like your strange presentation here, which even claims that the AAUW discounts the importance of discrimination--which they do NOT. I read the entire PDF, yet found nothing even slightly like your closing claim, "Buried in the report is a startling admission: 'After accounting for all factors known to affect wages, about one-quarter of the gap remains unexplained and may be attributed to discrimination' (my emphasis). Another way to put it is that three-quarters of the gap clearly has innocent causes -- and that we actually don't know whether discrimination accounts for the rest." Where do you claim the report states this? I did not find it, and neither did they. You refer to women at the beginning of careers working less than males, (with no explanation), yet do not mention that the AAUW study notes that as one of the things NOT part of the "unexplained" part of the wage gap, etc.

You also do the annoying routine of claiming that the pay gap is the result of women quitting jobs, wanting to stay home with children, etc., etc., although the study states over and over that they have corrected for all such extraneous factors, and do not count them as part of the unexplainable gap. Much background information is given on the studied groups: women had higher grades than males in high school and college, they took the same courses (under the similar-jobs parts of study), received higher degrees, more different types of degrees, etc., yet their pay difference was 5% immediately, with no explanation, and only increased, thus putting the lie to the "women don't have the same experience/don't stick to the job," etc., claim--as the years went on, and experience, even promotions, increased, the pay gap got WORSE, just as Lilly Ledbetter, an employee so good she got commendations, several "Employee of the Week/Month," etc., and was even a part of a very small group of the best employees, selected to implement a new training program for Goodyear managers. The study shows the gap increasing to 12% or more, as they found.

You fail to understand the meaning of the "one-quarter of the pay gap due to sexism" finding. It does not mean "75% of all stuff is hunky-dory"; it is a numerical measurement meaning 25% of the pay difference (and maybe more) could only have been due to discrimination. It does not refer to percentages of cases, but to the pay amounts themselves.

Why did you not refer people to the AAUW website--because they would have found that it did not agree with your silly claim that there is no bigotry against women? Because of course, they do no such thing. Their recommendations at the end include things women can do to fight discrimination in the workplace, etc. You then claim, on a later reply, (#27), "The AAUW is NOT a conservative group," an odd claim, as if that is the point to you, when the whole point is whether they did the study correctly and it was accurate, then you add helpfully, "Do your own damn research. I've done my research," when actually you have not, but have only gone to your own archconservative website with its "editorial" slant. You quote your conservative's claims about what it means, you never quote the report, then you claim it is "from" the AAUW, which it never is. It is from your "ibdeditorials.com" shit.

By the way, when you invent things like "women are underpaid because they are so silly, take off to raise kids, do not do work," blah blah blah, you then have to explain why white women earn some 77 cents for every dollar a white male earns, black women earn some 69 cents for every dollar, and Hispanic women earn some 59 cents for every dollar--are "they" successively "more lazy" or "taking more time off for more children," when the AAUW study itself finds no such pattern? Women have closed the pay gap by only some 2 cents a year since the introduction of the first Equal Pay law, 1963, to this day, as described by the Democratic speakers on the floor of the House, as they tried to bring the measure up for a vote Thursday; if left to the corporate criminals who caused the problem, it would never close.

You also do the typical hypocritical "flip" when trying to pretend there is no problem with this inequitable situation--for example, married males, because they are married and have children, are "stable" and this is why they "deserve" more money; married women on the other hand are "not serious," and "will leave for their children," on the basis of no evidence, and contradicting the AAUW study, which found no such pattern as a possible explanation.

There are a few versions of the AAUW study, available from their own actual website, from them themselves, and not archcon business websites, even! I suggest people read them; there is discrimination against women, from pay to lack or promotion, lack of control/influence on the job, lower (or no) benefits and pensions, and these things are unexplainable as anything other than bigotry and discrimination. Only a woman-hating archconservative would pretend, at this late date, otherwise.

AAUW "Behind the Pay Gap Press Release," with some background, a quicker summary of findings-- http://www.aauw.org/newsroom/pressreleases/042307_PayGap.cfm

Complete 67-page PDF-- http://www.aauw.org/research/upload/behindPayGap.pdf

AAUW "Behind the Pay Gap Press Kit," with other materials, executive summary, Capitol Hill testimony, etc.-- http://www.aauw.org/about/newsroom//presskits/payGap.cfm

A great deal of credit should go to Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, who has been trying to get equal pay legislation passed every year since 1997, and who put her July 31 floor statement on this issue, on her U.S. House website, at http://www.house.gov/delauro and click on it; the Paycheck Fairness Act, H.R. 1338.

[readmoreoften]

45. So because you don't like the result, you're just assuming its garbage economics.

And you're not citing any counter studies or critiques of the study. You're just fantasizing that there could be problems because you don't like the conclusion. Nice.

It must be that feminist agenda media machine oppressing the white man once again.

[XemaSab]

82. Wouldn't marriage lift 100% of female-headed households out of poverty

since men are usually the heads of household and after getting married there wouldn't BE a female-headed household any more? :crazy:

[AngryAmish]

2. About your headline - is that true with same education, experience and hours worked?

Married men earn a lot more than unmarried men. Ex-cons tend not to be married. No so much with married women, who works less due to children. Men who get married tend to have more education, higher IQs, longer work hours, etc. than unmarried men. (Married women tend to have more education, IQs etc but the difference is not as pronounced as with men).

Anyway, there is sexism but I'm not sure the comparison is apt.

[Breeze54]

4. YES... IT"S TRUE!! -Fair wages for equal work but it isn't happening!!

If women were paid fair wages for equal work, then maybe they wouldn’t need to get married just to stay afloat in today’s economy.

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/pdf/single_women.pdf

[CountAllVotes]

3. hard to believe it has gone down

it used to be .60 cents to the dollar. Now even less. :(

[helderheid]

5. Yea, I was surprised too.

:(

[Breeze54]

7. It's fucking criminal and needs to stop...now!!

:grr:

[helderheid]

19. It's fucking archaic.

[fed_up_mother]

20. It didn't go down. The comparison is stupid.

Married men tend to be more educated, employed, and stable - as a group - compared to unmarried women - as a group. Even if men and women were on par with each other, this very ridiculous comparison would show a disparity.

[Breeze54]

23. You're pretty dense for a neo-con.

:eyes:

[fed_up_mother]

34. You're pretty stupid throwing out your name calling

Is that all you have to defend your point of view?

Lies, damn lies, and statistics do nothing to persuade people to take action who can see through them. Try using some REAL facts, and not trumped up "studies" done purposely to get the worse outcome to make people angry. I just don't like that kind of science or politics, but then, maybe I'm weird that way.

[Breeze54]

40. Why do you hate the idea of women getting fair pay for equal work?

What's your agenda?

Read the OP and follow the links.... for the "Real Facts"....

[readmoreoften]

48. Why are they MORE EDUCATED and MORE EMPLOYED?

And of course they're more stable--people who have the social privilege of having their wives wash their underwear, who get hired first because of sexism, can afford to pay for education.

Those LACK OF OBSTACLES IN LIFE that married men have do tend to make them more stable as a group.

[fed_up_mother]

70. Yes, and when we have more egalitarian marriages

Married men and women will come closer to parity. However, I don't want the government in my bedroom, and I don't want them in my kitchen, either.

(Although my husband is quite egalitarian, and does A LOT around here, but with so many kids (some are adopted), it's the only way this household will operate without me going on strike.)

By the way, I know that not all folks are married. Hell, single mothers have it very hard, which is why we need to strongly advocate for more social programs.

[Breeze54]

75. Why do you keep defending that you adopted some kids?

Motherhood is a valuable JOB/Calling and the hardest 'job" in the world and I don't have any problem with a woman that chooses motherhood as her profession. I am also a mother of 3 sons but having EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK would have made a HUGE difference in our lives, as the GOV. (that you seem to think will help you) didn't enforce the Child Support Order! Can't you see how having this bill (Act) pass will only help people all across the board? Families and children and yes, women AND men too! It would lift women out of poverty and reduce their forced dependence on Gov. aid!! It would also help men, the struggling fathers that are trying to keep a family afloat because the Mom isn't making all the money she's entitled to be making. It would boost the economy and put more money in circulation. More goods would be bought. That would require more retail personnel, thereby creating more jobs and hopefully increasing manufacturing in the USA, and I mean IN the USA. This would be a WIN-WIN for ALL!

[fed_up_mother]

78. I'm not against the bill

I'm against government forced parity (equal pay for totally different jobs), and I'm against using stupid studies to make a case. PERIOD.

About mentioning that some of my children were adopted - I only mention that because of the many attacks on here against people who have larger than normal families. I don't need that crap. I didn't give birth to all of them, so I don't want to be dragged into another needless argument about contributing to overpopulation.

I do try to be environmentally conscious.

[Breeze54]

79. I'm not one of those

that attacks people who make that choice. I come from a large family. I have 7 brothers and sisters and I grew up in a time that it was not unusual for families to have 10 to 18 kids or more! That, of course, was before the pill and what a wonderful way to free women from the burden and death of constant pregnancy but I also believe in CHOICE. Whether it be to not have any children or to have 18. I applaud you for adopting children and I admire you for that. That's an awesome thing to do. :hug: My sister adopted a baby girl and she's my little sweetheart, Sarah! ;) I think that you and I want the same things but I'm not going to argue one study against another. It's well known and a given that women make less money then men do. Let's work together to bridge that gap, OK? :hug:

[ZombieHorde]

94. Motherhood is a valuable JOB/Calling and the hardest 'job" in the world

Being an at home mom is way easier than most jobs.

I do agree that it is very valuable and my above statement does not include pregnancy, birth, or recovery.

[supernova]

11. That's just ugly

:-(

Says a 46 year old single woman who really could be earning more.

[Breeze54]

13. Not could be... should be !! Call your reps and tell them to support the PFA!

Urge all your female and male co-workers to do the same!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Breeze54]

15. “Pay equity is not a women’s issue. It is a family issue."

Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (CT-3) http://www.house.gov/delauro/press/2008/July/Paycheck_Fairness_7_24_08.html">issued the following statement about the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338)
following approval by the House Committee on Education and Labor. The Committee passed the legislation, which would
prevent, regulate and reduce pay discrimination for women across the country, by a vote of 26—17. DeLauro has long worked
to close the wage gap between men and women, first introducing the Paycheck Fairness Act in 1997.

“Pay equity is not a women’s issue. It is a family issue. And with Committee approval of the Paycheck Fairness Act, today marks one of my proudest moments in Congress.

“After years of hard-work, we are inches away from finally bringing to the floor the Paycheck Fairness Act for a vote by the full U.S. House of Representatives. Last year, when Nancy Pelosi broke the marble ceiling to be sworn-in as Speaker of the House, women and young girls across the country were inspired to know that there is no job in this country they cannot do, and with this legislation, we send a second message, that when they do land that job, they will no longer be underpaid – that we value the work women do.

“We have made strides in the American workplace during the last quarter century, but our work is not done. Closing the wage gap is about fairness, opportunity and values. By ensuring pay equity we can help families gain the resources they need to give their children a better future – the great promise of our American dream.”

:applause: :applause:

[Breeze54]

16. How many women frequent DU daily? Anybody know?

I can't believe this OP topic is languishing...

The point of this OP was to not only educate people but to rally you all to call your reps and
ask them to vote YES on the The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338 and S.766) that will
be coming to the floor for a vote next week. This bill will help families, not just women.

[readmoreoften]

42. I'm sometimes shocked by it myself. With all the female execs on TV I guess folks think its true.

[Firespirit]

86. It is truly astounding

Women who define themselves and their value as human beings by whether they are married mothers or not, even throwing out garbage statistics claiming that fellow breederserm, heterosexual married mothers are actually SMARTER than other women.

Straight out of 1908. Wow.

Some people really need to change the URL in their browser to a certain different "underground" site.

[Breeze54]

17. kicking for the workers just logging in...

:kick:

[Breeze54]

18. Kicking for the early morning crowd!

:dem:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

25. This is why unmarried women need to get to the polls in droves.

GOP policies hurt us the most. We earn the least on average, and are the least likely to have health care benefits or pensions.

[Firespirit]

87. Yep

Then add being lesbian or bisexual (or transgendered, my gods I cannot imagine what it must be like for them) in one of the majority of U.S. states where it is a danger to you to be publicly out. It astonishes me that any self-proclaimed Democrat would defend it, justify it, and then add insult to injury by claiming that married heterosexual women are inherently smarter and more reliable. WOW. Enemies are everywhere and voting is of paramount importance.

[Luna_C_06]

26. Kick, nt.

[proud patriot]

29. k and r

[MrSlayer]

60. Everyone gets paid the same in my Union. Male, female, married or not.

Equal pay for equal work. Although there are some people that are flat out stealing.

[El Pinko]

95. The real pay gap is between the rich and the poor, IMO.

The wealthy make 10 to 1000 times as much as normal working people, be it male or female.

But I guess it's justified, because CEOs are 1000 times smarter, work 1000 times longer and harder, and are 1000 times more educated?


Don't get me wrong, We need to do something about gender and racial pay inequity.

But at least the law is supposed to require equal pay for equal work.



But it seems to me that the people in our society who work the hardest are the ones getting the least rewards...