• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Difference in wages between men and women's jobs

Alceste

Vagabond
I'll indulge you then and say I did.

Back to the topic, there seems to be no real wage gap based on gender alone when taking into consideration all factors relevant to the payment of employees.

So you have nothing but a YouTube video and a rape advocate supporting this assertion, and your opposition has endless academic studies, all of them concluding that women are paid less than men even working the same hours at the same job.

If you were reading this discussion and were undecided, which side do you think you'd come down on? The side with YouTube videos and rape apologists, or the side with research?
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
So you have nothing but a YouTube video and a rape advocate supporting this assertion, and your opposition has endless academic studies, all of them concluding that women are paid less than men even working the same hours at the same job.

If you were reading this discussion and were undecided, which side do you think you'd come down on? The side with YouTube videos and rape apologists, or the side with research?

Where? Show me one atudy that says that women gain less than men even when:

They work the same hours, have had the same amount of job experience or more than the male, working for the same job than the male in the same specialisation while both the male and the female being eir own bosses or both working for aomeone else?

By all means show me a study that displays these.

Remember, it most account ALL of those factors, because if it does not, then it is imossible to say e reason for the decreased payment comes from sex, given that the other factors have not been discarded.

And he is not a rape apologist, but that on itself is another debate topic if you wish toake such thread. As for his credentials :

Education

Warren Farrell holds a Ph.D. from New York University, a M.A. from UCLA in political science and a B.A. from Montclair State University in the social sciences.
Farrell graduated from Midland Park High School in New Jersey in 1961, where he was student body president. He was chosen by the VFW as his town's (Waldwick's) selection for New Jersey Boys' State. As a college student, Farrell was a national vice-president of the Student-National Education Association, leading President Lyndon B. Johnson to invite him to the White House Conference on Education.[5] While completing his Ph.D. at NYU, he served as an assistant to the president of New York University.[6]
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Where? Show me one atudy that says that women gain less than men even when:

They work the same hours, have had the same amount of job experience or more than the male, working for the same job than the male in the same specialisation while both the male and the female being eir own bosses or both working for aomeone else?

By all means show me a study that displays these.

Remember, it most account ALL of those factors, because if it does not, then it is imossible to say e reason for the decreased payment comes from sex, given that the other factors have not been discarded.

And he is not a rape apologist, but that on itself is another debate topic if you wish toake such thread. As for his credentials :

Education

Warren Farrell holds a Ph.D. from New York University, a M.A. from UCLA in political science and a B.A. from Montclair State University in the social sciences.
Farrell graduated from Midland Park High School in New Jersey in 1961, where he was student body president. He was chosen by the VFW as his town's (Waldwick's) selection for New Jersey Boys' State. As a college student, Farrell was a national vice-president of the Student-National Education Association, leading President Lyndon B. Johnson to invite him to the White House Conference on Education.[5] While completing his Ph.D. at NYU, he served as an assistant to the president of New York University.[6]

What does his education have to do with the fact that he thinks date rape is "exciting" and men should not be held accountable for it, and that he thinks it's ok to rape your children and the only reason they don't like it is social conditioning?

There are some very well-educated holocaust deniers out there too - that's a little less creepy.

Anyway, here is a study for you. Surely you recognize that being a lawyer is the same job whether you have a penis or not, right?
SF : Social Forces
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
What does his education have to do with the fact that he thinks date rape is "exciting" and men should not be held accountable for it, and that he thinks it's ok to rape your children and the only reason they don't like it is social conditioning?

There are some very well-educated holocaust deniers out there too - that's a little less creepy.

Anyway, here is a study for you. Surely you recognize that being a lawyer is the same job whether you have a penis or not, right?
SF : Social Forces

I can enter the link but I cant see the studies nor see whether the other specific factors were taken into consideration.

I also talked about specialisation. It is not the same pay to be a surgeon than to be a surgeon specialized in cardiology, does this study take this into consideration?
 

Alceste

Vagabond
I can enter the link but I cant see the studies nor see whether the other specific factors were taken into consideration.

I also talked about specialisation. It is not the same pay to be a surgeon than to be a surgeon specialized in cardiology, does this study take this into consideration?

It doesn't matter to me. Your YouTube video and rape apologist are the outliers. All other research is consistent. That puts the burden of evidence on you, not me.

Besides, since when do you feel you need to read entire studies with a critical eye? Moments ago it was enough for you just to hear a rape apologist make random claims without even referencing a specific study. Never mind actually following up to find out if he got it right. He agrees with you, so he doesn't merit any scrutiny at all, it seems.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
However, I think that there can still be discrepancies between similar jobs in different fields. If we look at two jobs in two industries that have different job titles but are similar in terms of things like level of responsibility, physical effort, time commitment, harshness of the working environment, required level of skill/education/etc., and size of the labour pool for each job, we can often find that traditionally female-dominated jobs pay less than equivalent male-dominated jobs.

This is a very good point.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
It doesn't matter to me. Your YouTube video and rape apologist are the outliers. All other research is consistent. That puts the burden of evidence on you, not me.

Besides, since when do you feel you need to read entire studies with a critical eye? Moments ago it was enough for you just to hear a rape apologist make random claims without even referencing a specific study. Never mind actually following up to find out if he got it right. He agrees with you, so he doesn't merit any scrutiny at all, it seems.

Agrees with me? i didnt know of the thing till I heard about it then I searched for more. You noticed you cannot account for all the factors Farrel mentions, you quited.

Why do I believe his posture? Well, bcause he is an influencial figure that came out of the NOW movement and has very good education. How is this relevant? He was batting for the other team. The reason he changed posture was that he saw how the NOW movement was deliberately leaving out information about the gap. His motivation was obviously neither money nor fame, given he already was the only man being asked to form part of the board of NOW 4 times and had a lot more money and already selling books while he was a feminist and didnt talk about this issues.

Then I use the same reasoning I use with evolution: I ve heard of no biologist of today refute it, and all of em assert it, so it must be true. When it comes to the gap, the position of there existing one based on discrimation is popular, but Farrel is the most popular opposition to it, naming it a myth and giving specific clear reasons for it. It would be impossble that he was not directly refuted if he didnt have a point because he is of the unpopular position. The same way all creationists arguments are easily dismissed with an immidiate google search by biiologists, yet eve going to page 15 of my search whith his arguments, I see no direct refutal.

I only see poisoning the well arguments, wich given their falacioius nature, truly only make it more clear that they have no ammo against that truth.

Neither do you. Neither have I seen anyone in this thread to quote a study that contemplates all the factors he mentioned.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
This is a very good point.

But what does it mean? "Traditionally" female jobs? Jobs in social sciences generally pay less than jobs in engeneering. That is how it is. A woman is not ( and should not be) forced to take the "traditional" jobs "for women" . As farrel points out, women are more less likelly to take a job they dislike only because of better pay than men. They are more interestd in fullfilment. Tis is not at all bad, and he does say many men should learn from the women in this, but that regardless, there is no surprise given this choices than the men make more.

They have sacrificed to make more. It woulde unequal that men earn equal if e stadistically sacrifice more. Now, on INDIVIDUAL cases, he acknowledges that there are men that would prefer to be house husbands and women who want to have carreer as goal number one, and he does not fight this. H only says each should be mindful on what they are loooking for on a realationship

He advices women that will put their job first to find a man that is willing to be more attentive on the kids and less on his work if he has one, thus assuming e role "traditionally" of the woman. Though he does say this is not a problem if the woman doesnt wish to have kids iher marriage. He advices the men equally: if you will put your job first let your partner know and look someone who will support you with the kids and family.

I think those views are very progressive and truly about equality.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Agrees with me? i didnt know of the thing till I heard about it then I searched for more. You noticed you cannot account for all the factors Farrel mentions, you quited.

Why do I believe his posture? Well, bcause he is an influencial figure that came out of the NOW movement and has very good education. How is this relevant? He was batting for the other team. The reason he changed posture was that he saw how the NOW movement was deliberately leaving out information about the gap. His motivation was obviously neither money nor fame, given he already was the only man being asked to form part of the board of NOW 4 times and had a lot more money and already selling books while he was a feminist and didnt talk about this issues.

Then I use the same reasoning I use with evolution: I ve heard of no biologist of today refute it, and all of em assert it, so it must be true. When it comes to the gap, the position of there existing one based on discrimation is popular, but Farrel is the most popular opposition to it, naming it a myth and giving specific clear reasons for it. It would be impossble that he was not directly refuted if he didnt have a point because he is of the unpopular position. The same way all creationists arguments are easily dismissed with an immidiate google search by biiologists, yet eve going to page 15 of my search whith his arguments, I see no direct refutal.

I only see poisoning the well arguments, wich given their falacioius nature, truly only make it more clear that they have no ammo against that truth.

Neither do you. Neither have I seen anyone in this thread to quote a study that contemplates all the factors he mentioned.

I don't need to listen to Farrell or counter his points. He thinks it's OK to rape your own children, and it's only social conditioning that prevents them from realizing how much fun it is to be raped by your parents. That says everything we need to know about his intellectual powers, and tells us more than anyone really WANTS to know for his motives behind promoting "men's rights", like the right to force their dates to have sex, because it's "exciting" not to stop when somebody tells you no, and they might not really mean it.

Find a better representative for your opinion. I've already wasted more time on Farrell than any sane person ever would. He's a loon, and you should just feel as embarrassed about promoting him and demanding that we take his views seriously as you would about promoting a holocaust denier.

I didn't quit - I gave you a study that demonstrates female lawyers earn far less than male lawyers for the same job. You're doing that thing where any comment that supports your side of the debate is unassailable without any critical investigation whatsoever, whereas no evidence provided by the other side will ever be good enough.

I don't play that game. It's dishonest. The score for providing research evidence is me: 1 you; 0. Your only options are to provide research supporting a different conclusion (RESEARCH, not youtube videos of quacks), or tip your king.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Without account of hours in the job, specializations on the job or years of experience in the job. Without these the studies say nothing.

Your whole argument is based on Poisoning the well - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, you have provided no research at all and I have provided one study. Your entire argument hinges on the credibility of one man. Pointing out that that particular man is an advocate of rape and incest directly addresses the issue of his credibility.

Are you ever going to provide a study to support your views, or are you just going to keep hero-worshiping a rape apologist and demanding that everybody else join in?
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
No, you have provided no research at all and I have provided one study. Your entire argument hinges on the credibility of one man. Pointing out that that particular man is an advocate of rape and incest directly addresses the issue of his credibility.

Are you ever going to provide a study to support your views, or are you just going to keep hero-worshiping a rape apologist and demanding that everybody else join in?

Again your study doesnt take into account all the factors and is us worthless to lead to the conclusions it propheses.

Te problem is that ey are unrelated issues. My argument stands on the credibility of THAT particular study the man did. His study about the wage gap.

So, answer this simle question: do you find it credible than if the study is wrong, there would be NO feminist backlash or anyones backlash pointing out the errors of such study?

Do you find that credible? Why has no one pointed out the wrongness of e study even while he continues to appear on TV and making books about it to this day ?

Why do women earn less than men? - Business - CBC News

Why? How?
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Again your study doesnt take into account all the factors and is us worthless to lead to the conclusions it propheses.

Te problem is that ey are unrelated issues. My argument stands on the credibility of THAT particular study the man did. His study about the wage gap.

So, answer this simle question: do you find it credible than if the study is wrong, there would be NO feminist backlash or anyones backlash pointing out the errors of such study?

Do you find that credible? Why has no one pointed out the wrongness of e study even while he continues to appear on TV and making books about it to this day ?

Why do women earn less than men? - Business - CBC News

Why? How?

What study? You mean the barrage of unsubstantiated claims he made 30 years ago in a youtube video? Or did I miss a link to an actual study? If so, please repost it and I'd be happy to read it.

Also, at what point did your original position that you needed to read the entire study to find out if it accounts for certain factors shift to absolute certainty that it doesn't?
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
What study? You mean the barrage of unsubstantiated claims he made 30 years ago in a youtube video? Or did I miss a link to an actual study? If so, please repost it and I'd be happy to read it.

Also, at what point did your original position that you needed to read the entire study to find out if it accounts for certain factors shift to absolute certainty that it doesn't?

Or at least hear the study saying it takes those factors into account. Given I dont read that it does, I assume it doesnt.

About his assertions, he has put them in a number of books of his, and again, which unsubstantiated claims? Why 30 years ago? I just passed you a video from 2013 of him talking about this on cbc news.

Instead of relying in yours or my evaluations I asm asking, where is there
ANY critique of his studies by any reputable sociologist? Because like it or not, he is a reputable sociologist, even though you say he condones rape and that being another subject(he has never said rape is okay) the thing is he is an influential person today who has talked aot the issue a lot, gives conferences in universities, in the news, etc.

You cant do that and put FALSE research without someone directly contradicting it. YOU CANT. SPECIALLY AFTER 30 YEARS OF CONSISTENCY repeating a FALSE claim.

He has said he is basing himself on a study he did on the US census (and
I think other sources as well) that when you take into consideration all the factors that he DOES MENTION the gap does not exist. Why then has no oppositor of his stance appeared in TV to debunk his debunking? It would make juicy news for a news channel to debunk what a host on another news channel said, why have no one take this opportity for 30 yearss? Do tell.
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Or at least hear the study saying it takes those factors into account. Given I dont read that it does, I assume it doesnt.

About his assertions, he has put them in a number of books of his, and again, which unsubstantiated claims? Why 30 years ago? I just passed you a video from 2013 of him talking about this on cbc news.

Instead of relying in yours or my evaluations I asm asking, where is there
ANY critique of his studies by any reputable sociologist? Because like it or not, he is a reputable sociologist, even though you say he condones rape and that being another subject(he has never said rape is okay) the thing is he is an influential person today who has talked aot the issue a lot, gives conferences in universities, in the news, etc.

You cant do that and put FALSE research without someone directly contradicting it. YOU CANT. SPECIALLY AFTER 30 YEARS OF CONSISTENCY repeating a FALSE claim.

He has said he is basing himself on a study he did on the US census (and
I think other sources as well) that when you take into consideration all the factors that he DOES MENTION the gap does not exist. Why then has no oppositor of his stance appeared in TV to debunk his debunking? It would make juicy news for a news channel to debunk what a host on another news channel said, why have no one take this opportity for 30 yearss? Do tell.

Jeez, still banging on about the rape apologist. Once again, this man has no credibility. Are you able to find ANYBODY ELSE who supports your view, but without the associated credibility issues? And where the heck is this "study" you keep talking about?

FYI, when he was interviewed by Penthouse to advocate incest, it seems he actually placed an ad searching specifically for women who thought being raped by their fathers was a positive experience, and thought that they must be lying when he could only find 6% of his overall sample group who thought it was, compared to 60% of the rapists who thought raping their daughters was a wonderful thing.

That calls his methodology into question, wouldn't you say?
 

Alceste

Vagabond
Haha ha that makes it alceste 0. Me Myself 2 .

Read the abstract.

They do not rule out discrimination, but they dont assert it, and they have less than 5% of an unexpłained gap. Then again, I ll read furer to see what else do I find in e source you presented to me.

A five percent gap is still a gap. You lose.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
A five percent gap is still a gap. You lose.

Again, LESS than 5 percent and the study DIRECTLY says that it CANNOT say if it is discrimination.

It also admits that women in general had less experience than the male counterparts, generally oung and unexperienced in relation, and chose firms at were smaller and thus payed less.
 
Top