Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries • Hacker News Board

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#381

Post by shkkmo » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 1:58 AM UTC

clevernickname wrote: post #370

shkkmo wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a bad assumption that will mislead you. The gender roles are not baked into our DNA. There are 'baked-in' DNA traits, that have emergently caused cultures to adopt those gender roles in their historical contexts. 'Baked-id' DNA traits are now emergently leading to the abandonment of gender roles in the context of western cultures & economies. Please re-evaluate your assumptions because they are wrong.

>The gender roles are not baked into out DNA. Men are larger and stronger than women, women are flooded with hormones during pregnancy that force a bond between them and their children. That is literally your biology encouraging a role. >There are 'baked-in' DNA traits, that have emergently caused cultures to adopt those gender roles in their historical contexts. Evolution is random chance leading to mutations that i…

> Men are larger and stronger than women, women are flooded with hormones during pregnancy that force a bond between them and their children.

Strength/size is a physical trait, not a gender role. Hormone release is a physical process, not a gender role.

>"A liberal swing in culture is trying to encourage people to abandon their traditional gender roles"

If you think that gender roles haven't changed repeatedly undergone significant change multiple times in the last several hundred year, you are living in a fantasy world.

> "people that do buck the traditional roles usually end up unhappy about it"

False. Please go do some research and re-evaluate your assumptions.

> "All I'm saying is that biology has a great influence on the roles people take up,"

No, you claimed that gender roles are baked into our DNA.

Biology has a great influence on everything, including people's choices of gender roles.

> "You have chosen your hypothesis and your conclusion and will ignore any evidence or train of thought that might lead you astray from it. "

Please provide said evidence, because it sounds like you are talking about yourself.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#382

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:11 AM UTC

chiaro wrote: post #267

leeleelee wrote: post #134

Nursing is a field dominated by women. And there are very large salary gaps between nurses with 0-10 years of experience and nurses with 10-20 years of experience. I'd also bet that there are much more women with 10-20 years of experience than men. So if you broke it down in the same way as the tech industry and did not control for job title or years of experience, you'd find a reverse gender gap in the same way you…

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/stubborn-pay-gap-is... Nope. Male nurses still make more, which, with respect to your post, is a strong data point in favor of the discrimination hypothesis.

[deleted]

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#383

Post by shkkmo » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:11 AM UTC

nickff wrote: post #372

shkkmo wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are usually less productive per week/month/year. You have evidence that this is true? If so, do you have evidence that the lower productivity is caused by (not simply correlated with) people being less stressed and happier? > "you are begging the question by assuming that people want to work less I am not. I said "if we want this". However, I think I would have a much easier time backing up the assertion "peop…

> "You have evidence that this is true? If so, do you have evidence that the lower productivity is caused by (not simply correlated with) people being less stressed and happier?" I never said low stress and low happiness cause low productivity; I am only saying that less hours means less total work output. > "I said "if we want this"." You imply that less work and more play is 'better' work-life balance, which assume…

> I am only saying that less hours means less total work output.

That is not what you said originally, but go ahead and back up that assertion instead.

Working fewer hours is correlated with higher productivity, possibly high enough that the increase in efficiency is high enough to overcome the reduction in hours when it comes to total output:

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecac...

That's just a correlation, and there are tons of confounding factors, but this question is not as straighforward as you seem to think.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#384

Post by eli » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:24 AM UTC

nxzero wrote: post #300

eli wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In STEM? Far fewer women graduate with CS degrees than men. I think that percentage is actually declining.

Have a source? My understanding is that there's been an overall decline in stem degrees; meaning that, if there's a gap, it's not due to gender bias or a lack of opportunities for a given gender. Basically, I don't buy it, but happy to be proven wrong too.

I'm on mobile, but I think this is the report I was thinking of https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2015/01/27/wo...

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#385

Post by bcook » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:24 AM UTC

thesimpsons1022 wrote: post #350

bcook wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, men & women are exactly the same & any conclusion otherwise is sexist/biased/anti-feminist/whatever. /s We (men & women) are different... (not "better or worse"). There is nothing offensive or biased about that.

I agree. But i don't see how you can go from that to assuming women are necessarily more emotional. You kind of need some data to back that up. Note that men murder and kill and rape at a high rate due to their emotions.

If I assume men are more emotional, do I deseve the same backlash?

Fuck PC culture. (Sorry, I am in a bad mood today. Irony unintended.)

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#386

Post by nickff » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:29 AM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #383

nickff wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "You have evidence that this is true? If so, do you have evidence that the lower productivity is caused by (not simply correlated with) people being less stressed and happier?" I never said low stress and low happiness cause low productivity; I am only saying that less hours means less total work output. > "I said "if we want this"." You imply that less work and more play is 'better' work-life balance, which assume…

> I am only saying that less hours means less total work output. That is not what you said originally, but go ahead and back up that assertion instead. Working fewer hours is correlated with higher productivity, possibly high enough that the increase in efficiency is high enough to overcome the reduction in hours when it comes to total output: http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecac... That's jus…

>"> I am only saying that less hours means less total work output. That is not what you said originally, but go ahead and back up that assertion instead."

That is actually what I said originally, as can be seen from the following quote:

>>>>"I agree that happier and less stressed people often (but not always) have higher specific productivity (output/hour), but they are usually less productive per week/month/year."

Worker productivity is usually defined as work per year; I refer to specific or hourly productivity as the amount of work you get done per hour in the office.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#387

Post by evoloution » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:30 AM UTC

clevernickname wrote: post #370

shkkmo wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a bad assumption that will mislead you. The gender roles are not baked into our DNA. There are 'baked-in' DNA traits, that have emergently caused cultures to adopt those gender roles in their historical contexts. 'Baked-id' DNA traits are now emergently leading to the abandonment of gender roles in the context of western cultures & economies. Please re-evaluate your assumptions because they are wrong.

>The gender roles are not baked into out DNA. Men are larger and stronger than women, women are flooded with hormones during pregnancy that force a bond between them and their children. That is literally your biology encouraging a role. >There are 'baked-in' DNA traits, that have emergently caused cultures to adopt those gender roles in their historical contexts. Evolution is random chance leading to mutations that i…

@clevernickname and @shkkmo you both have valid points and if you read carefully what you say you could agree. clevernickname is right on his points on sexual dimorphism; the hormonal and genetic differences that lead to changes in body shape/function and structural brain differences with certain tradeoffs do shape two different forms of our species geared towards different tasks. Now gender roles will depend on the environment that you throw the humans into (if shkkmo mentioned that, it would make sense). Is the environment hostile and hunting requires bringing down big strong animals? Then if women need to hunt alongside with men, this has an impact in the number of offsprings that can be reared (neanderthals). So in that case it was beneficial to have a structure where males hunt and women were gatherers this in turn may have selected for genes that make males better hunters and women better gatherers further increasing sexual dimorphism. In any case if humans are put in an environment where females have a more important role then cultural adaptations that would free up time for females to pursue this, would ensue as it has probably already happened in several occasions in the past as shkkmo mentions.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#388

Post by Kluny » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:32 AM UTC

thescribe wrote: post #364

Kluny wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say that you came up in the public school system, were raised by a mother who dropped out of the workforce and stopped her other contributions to society in order to raise you, received all the cheap or free healthcare that is available to minors, and took advantage of all the opportunities that society provides to young people in order to help them be successful and functional parts of their community. So you've…

I doubt any legal scholar would argue that a pre-schooler is able to sign a contract obliging them to pay back a student loan, so how can you say any given person owes society for their public school education?

I said that's my point of view. I had no intention of making a legal argument of it.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#389

Post by sdrothrock » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:33 AM UTC

wahrsagevogel wrote: post #263

jfaucett wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is in large part because care for family members(children and elderly parents usually) is more often foisted upon women in our society than on men." I disagree. The primary cause is that women can become pregnant - the possibility alone is in most cases enough - in which case they leave the work force for X amount of time. Depending on country, laws, and personal preferences this time period can range from a fe…

> For instance, in Germany the woman's job position must be held open for her until she decides to return to work (possibly years later), not to mention the full salary compensation months before and after giving-birth, when she is no longer working. The company will be reimbursed for the salary by the health insurance upon filling out a form. A company does not pay a single cent more than the cost of hiring another…

> A company does not pay a single cent more than the cost of hiring another person for the position.

Losing someone with expertise/connections and onboarding someone new is a huge cost, though. Not just in the new person's salary, but in opportunity cost as that person slows down the people they work with in the process of getting up to speed.

Re: Study Finds No Gender Gap in Tech Salaries

#390

Post by dalke » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 2:38 AM UTC

RodericDay wrote: post #374

dalke wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I see your point. I don't believe it's a useful one. What you are saying is that you want the government to fine, imprison, or otherwise punish a woman who, as CEO, signs a business deal three days after she gives birth, yes? Because that's what "mandatory" means. Unless "mandatory" only applies to the father? In which case, why is the father prohibited from signing a business deal three days after the mother g…

This is ridiculous. The policy could be something like "take a month off within a year of your kid being born". > What you are saying is that you want the government to fine, imprison, or otherwise punish a woman who, as CEO, signs a business deal three days after she gives birth, yes? Do you sincerely think this is a good post?

I sincerely think that the benefits are not worthwhile.

Every mandatory requirement must be backed by penalty, otherwise it's merely optional. Such penalties can include fines, jail, lack of access to social services, and forced removal of one's child.

We know already that 1/4 of Swedish fathers prefer to take no leave, even when there's an 80% salary support. (I don't know how many Swedish mothers take less than a month of leave.)

Any fines must therefore be more than 20% of three months' salary, and even higher for those making over $100K/year.

Any system must also have a way to identify lawbreakers, and allow appeals and special circumstances.

The Swedish experience shows that the father tends to put the extra time into the summer, Christmas, and New Year holidays. If the goal is increased co-parenting - which I believe is your goal - then 1 month spread over a year, especially in a vacation-poor country like the US, is very likely not enough.