Modern Feminism gives women an excuse to be horrible people.

You want apples to apples?


So as you can see, even in traditionally female dominated jobs like teaching, housekeeping and nursing, they still make less than their male counter parts.

 

We have to be very careful with semantics here. 'Same' means an exact equivalent; thus Taylor flipping burgers at Burger King and Tyler flipping burgers at McDonald's do not have the same job.

There is always a reasonable explanation for wage differences because it would not really make sense for any employer to have a man and a woman with the same job but pay the man more. Any decent entrepreneur would fire the man and hire another woman; she offers the same service with equal productivity to a lower price so why waste money on the man? Having two women would generate more profit!

Now, let us assume that Tyler and Taylor both work flipping burgers at the same McDonald's, but still Tyler makes more, then there are a couple of possible explanations.
- Tyler might be working longer hours.
- Tyler might have longer experience.
- Taylor might be a terrible negotiator and voluntarily, agreed to a laughable salary.

If we assume Tyler and Taylor have the exact same background, age and work the same amount of hours, but still Taylor is paid less than her male co-worker, Taylor always has the oppurtunity to confront her boss or just quit her job and leave McDonald's one (wo)man down, having to start their recruitment-process all over again, wasting time and losing money. As you can see, most likely McDonald's would have to agree paying Taylor the same as Tyler in this kind of confrontation too.

All rules of the market simply speak against the wage gap on both a theoretical- as well as on a practical level. In accordance with this, also the statistics speak against the wage gap (anything else would have been rather proposterous).

I have read all the raports from various different Swedish agencies and none of them can point at an existing wage gap where "boyz make mo' dan gueRlz fo' da saMe joB". I would assume the same applies to America and every other market economy.

 

That diagram does not take under consideration anything but gender and amount of hours worked. Thus, it can only represent a very skewed picture of reality that serves your agenda very well.

"Designer", "elementary school teacher", "truck driver" etc are very abstract categories; what about specialisation within the field? What about experience? In real life, jobs are never that homogenous.

Hypothetical thought experiment
PF is the name of small village of 30 inhabitants with only two possible employers. The jobs are very basic and require no broader skill. "Employer I" hires 5 women and 10 men and pay them all 20$/hour. "Employer II" hires 10 women and 5 men, paying them 10$/hour.

In PF the average salary of all men will be 20×10+10×5÷15= 16, 66$ and for women 20×5+10×10÷15= 13, 33$. Here it seems as if there is a wage gap of about 3, 33$ when there infact is no difference in pay at all.,

 

Except for the fact that Employer I does not hire women at all. You actually have proven the feminists' point. It is not just about an employer paying employees the same wage for the same work because of gender, it is about the "choice" jobs going just to men.

 

For decades, liberals have claimed that discrimination blocks women from landing academic positions in STEM fields. However a paper published online by the National Academy of Sciences by Wendy M Williams and Stephen J. Cecil titled National Hiring experiments Reveal 2:1 Faculty Preference For Women on STEM Tenure Track found that in experiments with professors from 371 colleges and universities across the United States that science and engineering faculty actually preferred women two-to-one over identically qualified male candidates for assistant professor positions.

If you’re preferred 2:1, you’re not being discriminated against. Some people might even suggest a 1:1 preference of identically qualified candidates would be equality and a 2:1 preference for women over identically qualified male candidates is actually an indication of discrimination against men, not women.

Stephen J. Cecil and Wendy M. Williams, “National Hiring Experiments Reveal 2:1 Faculty Preference For Women on STEM Tenure Track,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/...ulty-positions

 

Oh, I thought we were talking about jobs in general.

 

Eh, what? You clearly haven't got a clue what you are talking about, do you? First off, you clearly missed my point and secondly, what do you mean that a certain type of jobs "goes to men"? You cannot have a job you don't even apply for, right?

All rules of logic, econonics and mathematics speak against the wage gap. In accordance with this, obviously, the statistics speak against it too. If there are norms and structures "holding away" women from certain occupations is a whole nother discussion. Truth is that the same job offers the same salary.

 

If a woman and a man who are equally productive work at a potato-field and the potatoes they harvest are sold to the local supermarket for a dollar each and the man is paid 1 dollar per harvested potato whereas the woman is only paid 0, 77 dollars per harvested potato...The best thing the owner of the potato-land can do is to fire the man and hire another woman.

For the sake of it, let's assume both the man and the woman harvest 100 potatoes/hour, this would mean the landowner makes absolutely no profit from the man whereas he earns 13 dollar for the woman's labour.

Man
Productivity: 100 potatoes/hour
Salary/hour: 100$
Supermarket pays: 100$
Landowner's profit: 0$

Woman
Productivity: 100 potatoes/hour
Salary/hour: 77$
Supermarket pays: 100$
Landowner's profit: 13$

In a world where this was the absolute law and undisputable social norm, all men would be unemployed (unless they became entrepreneurs of course) because no entrepreneur in his/her fullest mind would ever hire John for 100$/hour if they could get equally productive Jane for only 77$/hour.

I never taken any class in economy on any level whatsoever and I have also always hated mathematics with a passion and despite this I am logical enough to both smell the bs in- and point out the fallacies in the watered out argument of "muh, wage gap"

As you can see, wage-discrimination is utter bogus. Now go and find you something else to complain about that actually has roots in facts, reality and logic. ;nod:

 

I have never seen a feminist protest on this issue, not find it remotely plausible. Germaine Greer maybe, but "Modern Feminism" has rejected thinkers like her.

That doesn't occur.

This can never possibly be substantiated. I totally and utterly reject that allegation. I have seen first hand how easy it is for a woman to make a false allegation (though my own experience did not involve rape) and for the entire machine of the state commence in its hardest earnest to make that allegation stick. And when it becomes irrefutably false? The woman just walks away claiming I "got away with it"
I'm afraid I really don't put any store in statistics that suggest men are getting away with rape. I just can't trust it now. I don't believe the state would have faltered in the slightest in attempting to lock up the accused, regardless of guilt.

 

I am a little surprised at the misogyny here.

1. Men are herd animals as well as women. We are all herd animals. I have seen packs of men, dressed the same, judging each others girlfriends. I have seen packs of gays do the same. Its a human trait.
2. Men are good followers and women are good leaders.

I will however say that men seem to travel more freely and further than women, for work at least, and work longer hours. They also make up the majority of economic migrants. I don't know whether that is instinctive or social, but it seems to be global across cultures.

 

Where is the misogyny exactly?

Generally speaking, women are more "collectivisticly orientated" than men due to evolutionary factors.

 

You'd have to back that up.
The evidence is that collectivism is a social strategy employed by lower social-status individuals in group settings. Amongst all female groups in isolation, individualistic and collective tendencies are not discernable from all-male groups.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=os83tN_lThcC&pg=PA248&lpg=PA248&dq=are+women+more+collectively+oriented&source=bl&ots=W5kJiMrHzo&sig=H90lSe1KnA5vnwhv35JDqJVWlPc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3qK33kOXSAhUMIsAKHURQBMoQ6AEIKzAC#v=onepage&q=are women more collectively oriented&f=false

 

Donald Trump. "Grab them by the *****".

I think it is a no contest

 

Here are some excerpts from the book The Mating Mind that explain the evolutionary basis of why men tend to work harder than women...

Human culture has been dominated by males because human culture is mostly courtship effort, and all male animals invest more energy in courtship. Male humans paint more pictures, record more jazz albums, write more books

It’s the same in nature too. Male nightingales sing more and male peacocks display more impressive visual ornaments. Similarly, male humans sing and talk more in public gatherings and produce more painting and architecture

Anthropologists have found in hunter gatherer cultures the men who are the most charming, the most respected, the most intelligent. They may have two or three times as many offspring…In pastoral cultures the men who have the largest herds of animals attract the most women. In agricultural societies the men who have the most land, wealth, and military power attract the most women.

In the game of science, sounding sexist is not a good reason to ban a theory. Science is the one zone of human thought where ideological preferences are not supposed to influence the assessment of ideas and evidence.

 

First and foremost, please show proof that men work harder than men. Personally, I've witnessed that women are some of the hardest working people around. Like the old proverb, "Man may work from sun to sun, But woman's work is never done."

Secondly, we are humans, not nightingales or peacocks (they are not even in the same class, mammalia, as us).

Finally, this is just one hypothesis and it has many detractors.

 

Effort is very hard to prove, but fact is that statistics show that men (on average) work longer hours. Which does not necessarily have to mean "harder", but nonetheless it is what was meant with "men work harder". If you work more, you obviously get paid more.

That saying has do with women as homemakers though.

 

What do the detractors of this, 'theory,' argue???

...and the scientific definition of a theory is different than the colloquial definition of a theory.

The colloquial definition of a theory is, "an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action."

On the other hand, Scientists call theories, 'theories,' and not facts because scientists never consider a theory complete.

Even the most accepted theories in science are called theories and not facts, for example, the theory of evolution.

With the advent of molecular biology in the 1930's, the theory of evolution did indeed change and with the discovery of horizontal gene transfer in 2005 the theory of evolution changed again.

 

Compared to women, a larger percentage of men work overtime, and men who work overtime work more overtime hours. Conversely, a larger percentage of female workers currently work part-time Pg. 17 “An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women”

CONSAD Research Corporation 2009. “An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women” Prepared for The United States Department of Labor Employment Standards Administration Accessed August 23, 2015. http://www.consad.com/content/report...l Report.pdf

 

I recall reading a report concluding part-time working women make more than part-time working men. Anyways, this issue is rather irrelevant and extracting wage-data based on physical attributes one can conclude things like;
- Lesbians are privileged.
- Gays are privileged.
- Tall men and skinny women are privileged.
- Jews are privileged.
- Japanese-Americans are privileged.

Should there be equal pay for straight, white, short and fat Americans? I mean the statistics above suggest that each and everyone of these groups are discriminated against when it comes to salary.

 

Several researchers have found that employees who work nominally unpaid overtime (i.e., overtime hours for which no explicit premium in excess of basic straight-time wages has been paid) are both paid higher wages and experience greater growth in earnings over time than do otherwise comparable workers who do not work overtime or who work fewer overtime hours. [Bell & Hart, 1999; Bell, Hart, Hubler, & Schwerdt, 2000; Pannenberg, 2002]

 

DarkDaimon is yet to respond to any of ryobi's or my posts with a real argument rooted in sense, reality and logic. (S)He is still to prove there is an actual and existing, direct salary-discrimination against women resulting in a wage gap of 0.77$/1$.

 

Nevermind...

 

Actually, the more unrelated organisms are yet those organisms share a similar kind of behavior, it shows how early that behavior evolved,

organisms like birds sharing similar behavior as hominids shows that females evolved to choose high status males early in evolutionary history.

 

Psychological adaptions that are shared with the vast majority of organisms evolved hundreds of millions of years ago.

Whereas psychological adaptions that are only shared by closely related species only evolved a few million years ago.

 

The thing is that most women are attracted to someone who shows he is able to be a loving father. Looks and political belief is not of their concern, infact thete are very few men that women find attractive. MGTOW's major problem is that they whine and cry like little boys, characterics that will never get any man a date with anyone. Feminism is not the problem some men cannot get a girl, the problem is only and solely their lousy personality.