Class is brainwashed

>>17719508
It's already illegal for an employer to pay a woman less than her male counterpart.

>>17719508

its true though. not universally, but when it comes to higher up positiosn women tend to make less.

women and minorities actually. its not a BIG deal, i mean you negotiate your own pay, and women are not taught to negotiate and such.

its a small issue that gets smaller each year as negotiated pay is becoming less and less. most companies have standard for a job and women are just les likely to haggle adn such.

its not like they're all magically making less minimum wage then the rest of us.

The actual study that it's based on. It admits that the biggest point of "wage gaps" is that there are fewer women in upper management.

>>17719519

The majority of the workforce is in customer service, where you don't really get a chance to negotiate your wage. And then there's government workers, where you REALLY don't have any room for negotiation. Only Libertarians think that people are paid less than $200k/year because they don't "want it" enough.

>>17719520
>that the biggest point
Is key here. It still exist in identical and just because it's not as huge as it is overall and mostly limited to jobs where you negotiate your wage doesn't really negate the problem.

>>17719528

so yes? nothing you said disagrees with what i said.

>>17719538

No. The point is that women aren't doing the same jobs, so they aren't being paid the same money. It's like being upset that the janitor isn't making as much as the CEO. It's stupid to point out the discrepancy and say "LOOK, IT EXISTS!"

>mostly limited to jobs where you negotiate your wage
No, it isn't. Wage gaps technically exist in all jobs (negotiated or not) specifically because women aren't becoming managers or engineers. Nobody's stopping them from becoming either of them.

>>17719552
Nigga, do you even read? Let's quote what YOU wrote...

>It admits that the biggest point of "wage gaps" is that there are fewer women in upper management.
This addresses your "fewer managers/engineers" point as the BIGGEST factor, not the only one.

>Nobody's stopping them from becoming either of them.
While not stopping per se, they are often discouraged and have a harder path, although this is a complex issue beyond wage gap.

>>17719552
If I say that I will get lynched by everyone, implying that women aren't capable enough to be engineers/CEOs

>>17719517

my sided. you have no idea about shit do you?

racism and sexism is over guys it's illegal!

fuck rtw laws and capitalism m8s.

>>17719552
It's not ridiculous to point out that jobs that are usually filled by women pay less. Teachers and nurses, for example, don't get a great salary, and it sure as shit isn't because they don't work hard enough.

And not only are women discouraged from negotiating a high salary (even in the jobs where that is possible), and taught not to be demanding, but those who DO stand their ground are almost always viewed negatively. There have been studies about this - the same personality traits that get a man called "a good leader" and "assertive" will get a woman called "bossy" and "bitch."

>>17719602
>Teachers and nurses, for example, don't get a great salary, and it sure as shit isn't because they don't work hard enough.
That's more down to capitalism than sexism though.

>>17719609
It is most certainly down to both.

Imagine you're a ceo. Your companies job is to make profit for the investors and yourself. If all women made 78 cents on the dollar to men, why wouldnt you hire only women? Theyd be cheaper and if they do all the samd work, then itd be perfect.

The problem with the "wage gap" is that it includes houseparents on the same index as ceo's. It compares those that work at mcdonalds to those that create the next big google project. Women are graduating college at a higher rate then men, have prefferential treatment for hiring, and still they say that women will get paid less.

Bottom line is tobget a job that pays well and negotiate your salary. Every job except my first i negotiated, and magically I got more money than the other hires becauss they didn't fight for it. Be qualified for what your applying for, and the world is your oyster, regardless of genitals.

>>17719602
So how do I get them to listen to facts and not deny them? They think that women are paid less than a man with the same job and same work time.

>>17719628
> Every job except my first i negotiated, and magically I got more money than the other hires
This was already addressed. A male confident is his skills is usually viewed positively. A female displaying confidence tends to be viewed negatively.

Nice 78cents strawmanning though.

>>17719635
nvm already pointed out

>>17719621
To a point but I am sure economics play a bigger part. We simply don't reward some important hard working jobs as others; whether the people doing them have dicks or pussies.

>>17719639
A bitchy woman and a douchebag are already set for failure if not in a sales position.

I wasnt confident, i was nervous as shit. I needed those jobs and i needed money. Its sticking to your guns and being polite.

78 cents is the wage gap claim isnt it? Or is it less now? I can never keep up with how far they try twist the bullshit

>>17719602
All true.

But the flip side of that is also pretty true. The traits that get a woman called "affable" or a "team player" and someone that "people just like working with/for" are the ones that get a man labeled as a "pussy" and lacking leadership qualities.

The world values what it values. If I don't get to make a public stink about how unfair it is that I can't climb the corporate ladder or have women lining up to suck my cock for being a nice guy, I'm not all that interested in hearing women complain about how unfair it is that they can't get what they want by by acting like a perfunctory and overly demanding bitch. Double standards pretty much always balance out across the gender lines. A lot of women just want all the privileges of the alpha male while STILL being able to enjoy the privileges of femininity when it suits them, and they can fuck all the way off with that "have their cake and eat it too" entitled bullshit. It's the very definition of feminine privilege to even be thinking that they should be allowed to "have it all." Do you even live in the real world? Who the fuck have you ever met that "has it all"?

>>17719646
You're... responding to a whole bunch of stuff that I never said.

Yes, men displaying feminine traits are shit upon as well. Yes, that is also a problem. It is not the problem we're discussing right now, though. OP created a thread about the wage gap, and the fact is that the economy is set up to reward men acting masculine. When you bring up "But men have different disadvantages!" the only thing it does is derail the conversation. Go create another thread for that.

>>17719579
just saying a woman could sue an employer if she really was getting payed less than her male counterpart.

>>17719645
>78 cents is the wage gap claim isnt it?
It's the attention grabbing, catchy headline with faulty basis, addressing an actual problem. Something to start the conversation, nothing more. (Hopefully)

>A bitchy woman and a douchebag are already set for failure if not in a sales position.
Not really, a douchebag has a pretty decent in every career assuming he isn't a dumb one. A bitchy woman could do it only in some niche branches like modeling or film.

>I wasnt confident, i was nervous as shit.
You was still confident enough in your skills to try it; and as a male your action was viewed different than it'd be if it came from a women. On the average.

>>17719659
From the study...

The coefficients for the female dummy variables indicate that female work-
ers are about 50% less productive than male workers, but they receive 70%
lower wages. This productivity and wage gap is consistent with sex discrim-
ination against women. However, before reaching a conclusion, we must be
careful about the possible correlation between a positive productivity shock
and the proportion of female employment because female workers often are
regarded as marginal workers and are subject to a more frequent employment
adjustment in Japan (Houseman and Abraham [1993]). We deal with this
problem in the next section.

So even if we include lower productivity, they still get shafted pretty bad.

>>17719663
It's on topic. The wage gap discussion is ostensibly about equal compensation (pay) for equal circumstances (the work). I raise the point about larger gender roles/inequalities because I think it's important to really question whether those circumstances are in fact equal when the fundamental expectations for men and women in our society are, in fact, different.

A man and woman may serve in the same professional role, but being one sex vs. the other can drastically alter what it means to serve in that capacity and even how they went about obtaining the position.