What's the wage gap?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Nope, I'm not.
Market efficiency isn't the only factor that controls markets. Animal spirits, remember?
The latest recession was never called the mancession.
Actually I think you'll find that I didn't weigh in on average, hourly, or per-capita wages. In brief:
1/2) Women are variously underemployed and underpaid (this is observational) due to a complex web of social, cultural, economic, and other factors, including but not limited to normative gender roles and opportunities for childcare (the accepted concensus)
3) Is my hypothesis to explain the exceptions, local as they are in time and space. There does seem to be a surge in female employment when traditionally patriarchal societies become capitalistic; indeed, I've heard it argued that the garment factories of Asia are inadvertently driving female emancipation because they're hoovering up all of the cheap female labour that couldn't get into stereotypically male jobs, and those women are then becoming independent.
Wouldn't the logical inference from that be that men in technologically advanced, socially developed Western societies deserve at least some proportion of feminist women?
1) I wasn't aware that Emma Watson was blaming men.
2) There's no logical path from "both sides are at fault" to "one side needs to do this first before the other side needs to address it".
3) You've not actually substantiated your premise, but I'm going to let that slide because the downstream arguments are more interesting.
I'm sorry you clearly can't tell I'm taking the piss out of a position that you advanced earlier.
Yes, the "women first" bias in the UK court system's awards of custody certainly needs to be addressed. If people who claimed to stand up for men's rights spent their time addressing these issues and not nit-picking feminists we'd probably have that licked by now.
No doubt. I'm talking in very, very broad strokes here.
Yes, and? 98% and 99% are both vast majorities, but that's the difference between 200 million people getting the short end of the stick and 100 million people getting the short end of the stick.
You might as well say "the vast majority of people live past reproductive age" and say that we can pack in modern medicine.
Yes, and that's one of the ideas that keeps coming up: it's not a men-vs-women issue, anyone can hold these problematic preconceptions about women's roles in society.
I don't know. I will say that men have exactly the same opportunities when it comes to being convicted of sexual assault, so what is there to complain about? The law's perfectly even-handed, and it'd be churlish to ask for special treatment because of one's gender.
There's a difference between men who believe in men's rights, and the Men's Rights Movement. Unfortunately it's the latter who are allowed to control the issues.
Oh, I'm not female. I do, however, work in an environment where I'm having to think carefully about how childcare needs can be balanced with future career prospects. People drop out all the time and it's not because they choose to.
The logical answer is that gender-biased hiring patterns are overriding the market's inherent rational balancing mechanisms. I mean, clearly it's not the free hand of the market making the call if you have an inequality that disadvantages both one group and market efficiency, while acting to the advantage of another group.