241–250 of 398 posts
"Pay gap is fake" "Prove it" Cites stuff "Unrelated/invalid" *Conversation derails
Scrollinf half way, i saw this easily 5 times.
It's as if people stick to their beliefs despite any arguments that are made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny enough, I agree with both you and the person you're arguing against. I agree that the wage gap (as defined by the difference in how much men and women earn when working in the same position with the same skills) is probably pretty close to 6%. [0] I also agree that there is a big problem currently. In my opinion, the problem is twofold. First of all, this gap - whatever you think it is, 6% or 9% or 21% - it is…
> The second part of the problem is societal: women are discouraged from pursuing higher-paying jobs by society. This isn't the fault of the women themselves I really think that point of view is both wrong and harmful. It's true that society influences people in various ways. But you're assuming that what men do is the "default", and so if women do it less, they are discouraged. Instead, looking at it from the women'…
> I really think that point of view is both wrong and harmful.
> It's true that society influences people in various ways. But you're assuming that what men do is the "default", and so if women do it less, they are discouraged.
Additionally, it seems implicit in the GP's POV that money (or higher pay) is necessarily the better end goal, rather than caring for others or improving society. What if money isn't the most appropriate proxy of value and worth?
(And to be clear, I wouldn't agree with using that to "whitewash" paying someone less because "their pay should be their enjoyment")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny enough, I agree with both you and the person you're arguing against. I agree that the wage gap (as defined by the difference in how much men and women earn when working in the same position with the same skills) is probably pretty close to 6%. [0] I also agree that there is a big problem currently. In my opinion, the problem is twofold. First of all, this gap - whatever you think it is, 6% or 9% or 21% - it is…
> The second part of the problem is societal: women are discouraged from pursuing higher-paying jobs by society. This isn't the fault of the women themselves I really think that point of view is both wrong and harmful. It's true that society influences people in various ways. But you're assuming that what men do is the "default", and so if women do it less, they are discouraged. Instead, looking at it from the women'…
To say women are discouraged from taking higher paying positions takes away a woman's agency. Perhaps they made an educated decision?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be interesting to see the data on this. I've worked in software development for 20 years and hired tons of people (maybe over 100). I think that professional jobs have the lowest pay disparity. I would imagine it's really hard to measure the pay gap between programmers because there are literally coders that are 2x or 5x more productive than other coders. So I don't think it's as simple as checking all the p…
Did you pay those 2x to 5x coders 2-5x more than the regular coder?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If men become doctors and women become nurses, or if men become Software Engineers and women become Test Engineers, then there's still something wrong with the world. "Adjusting for profession" ignores the cultural context of terms like "pay gap" -- we come from a world where women couldn't work certain jobs at all.
> If men become doctors and women become nurses, or if men become Software Engineers and women become Test Engineers, then there's still something wrong with the world. Imagine that doctors and nurses were paid the same. Would you still think that? Other than salary, neither being a doctor or a nurse is "better". One is more technical, the other involves more personal contact, but neither of those is better, just dif…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because women are subconsciously undervalued as workers. This discussion is complex and it's not entirely obvious how much of the pay gap is caused by discrimination, but this is one stupid argument.
There are software companies composed of all men (or 95% men if we want to be a bit more relaxed). Successful ones - as in making profit. Where are all-women (or 95% women) companies? If you can get away with paying them less, where are all the capitalists exploiting the market inefficiency and getting rich in the process? Hell, nowadays companies like Starbucks[0] routinely put social causes first, profits second. S…
Efforts to reduce imbalance (regardless of demographic) is necessary to overcome location bias, and the bigger the pool, the higher the tide for all boats.
If you're "labor", stop thinking that you're at war with other demographics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps there are disparaging comments because people love to quote misleading statistics... kind of just like you did. From the glassdoor wage gap study you mentioned in [2]: > After taking into account differences in education and experience, men working at tech companies overall make 5.9 percent more than women do From a brief scan of the study they didn't control for hours worked and they are already down to 5.9%…
Ok, I can appreciate skepticism. But do you have any arguments to advance yourself? Wage gaps are hugely complex, and the stats put out by the labor department (fuck Glassdoor, whatever) are both controlled, detailed, and fairly damning. Women make less on average in almost every field, women are employed less in high paying jobs, and the jobs that are heavily weighted towards women do not pay nearly as much. I don't…
Are they?
From what I have seen the consensus is:
An overall small 3-6% wage gap after accounting for basic life choices.
Women under 30 + childless women significantly out-earning women with children + older women.
Women under 30 + childless women have almost no wage gap and in many industries are out-earning their male peers.
Life is rough for the bottom 50% of earners - male and female.
What exactly do you think the stats show?
> and the jobs that are heavily weighted towards women do not pay nearly as much.
Why are you talking about women like they are objects without agency?
My friends in game design work harder than I do and earn half what I earn.
They made a trade-off and work in a more interesting and rewarding job that pays less.
They certainly aren't oppressed and discriminated against.
Now this isn't really true at the bottom end of the scale. But it is for the middle class and up.
> Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) had arrived on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2017 to debate the confirmation of attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions. Feb 8, 2017 was a Wednesday, not a Tuesday.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, I can appreciate skepticism. But do you have any arguments to advance yourself? Wage gaps are hugely complex, and the stats put out by the labor department (fuck Glassdoor, whatever) are both controlled, detailed, and fairly damning. Women make less on average in almost every field, women are employed less in high paying jobs, and the jobs that are heavily weighted towards women do not pay nearly as much. I don't…
The claim is that women (im aggregate) make different life choices than men, and once we account for those, the "wage gap" disappears. I honestly don't see anything wrong with different life choices leading to different outcomes, since the same is true within genders! That is, there's nothing sexist about that fact. The truth is the people advocating for equalizing pay when the sexes make different choices are arguin…
If it's not baseless, presumably you have something to offer.
However, without evidence, you are most likely wrong. Does that wrongness amount to sexism? Hard to say; my inclination says yes since you're referring to shuffling hundreds of dimensions defining employment into "life choices". Yes, that is probably a factor; culture is a powerful force. But it's also probably not the only factor; there are likely myriad explanations. Are you blind to that, or just dismissive?
I really wish they would quit promulgating this because it's actually counterproductive: "women face continued pay disparity" Seeing this statement tells me immediately that the author is grinding an ax. In some fields of engineering (EE, for example), women actually get paid more (104% last I checked). And, when you control for experience, time off for family, etc., pay disparities in most tech fields almost disappe…
That's a big "etc" to throw around - do you mind elaborating?
What else beyond time off for family could possibly be in this list to the degree that pay disparities disappear?