Men and Women... Equals in Society and the Workplace?

Remove all ads!

Which is why they make less than 75 cents to the dollar that men make for the same job, and why they are treated as 'sluts' if they sleep with more than one man (while that is seen as a good quality with men), and why there are two main types of sexuality for women: femme fatale (which is only in bed, you can't show this dominance outside of the bedroom or you are seen as *****y) and feminine (which is how you are supposed to act in public; dress nicely, be subservient, etc. If you aren't, you are a ***** who is out of place), and why women who are in positions of power are generally viewed as not being able to handle personal lives (they can only manage one or the other, while men can do both).

I could go on, but it would turn into a rant. And all of these are true by societal standards in the US (and no, a committe didn't write them down, they are observations that have very few exceptions).

 

Those may have been true observations about 20 years ago, Saber, but I haven't seen any of them being true in the modern day. Well, maybe the bit about a woman who sleeps around being a slut, but any guy who does the same is seen similarly these days. As to why women generally make about 75% of men in the same position and get promoted less frequently, my wife actually recently completed a course on this stuff. Here are some reasons:
1.)women are far less likely to negotiate their salary, which means they start lower than men simply because they don't assert themselves as much
2.)women are generally far less likely to be willing to work overtime
3.)women are generally far less likely to be willing to travel for business
4.)women are generally far less likely to ask for a raise/promotion.
5.)women are still far more likely to take maternity leave, and leave the job as a whole to raise a family, than men are to take paternity leave or leave the job to raise a family. The former is basically an extra perk they've demanded (and deserve, no complaints) and the latter puts a gaping whole in their carreer development that puts them back to start.

So yes, women are still payed less than men, but not because of a sexist attitude on the part of men. In fact, the biggest detractor, starting pay, is because of a sexist attitude (of themselves) on the part of women, and the other big ones are because the woman isn't willing to work as long or hard hours if it isn't needed (prefer to put the family first). Again, I don't criticize women for either of those, they aren't faults, but they are characteristics that will result in less pay and fewer promotions.

Now, you're experience may still be true for some small portion of American society, but statistics and sociology says that that portion is essentially a throw-back, not the core of society anymore.

Gnarff:
Don't LDS believe in multiple layers of heaven? I'm pretty sure it's something like unmarried women and children get to one layer, and married women get to another, or something.

 

Why are women less likely to assert themselves and less likely to work overtime then?

 

I haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about but it sounds like a good topic for another thread and I could really sink my teeth into and enjoy. nothing I love more than a good argument, as long as it is kept friendly and no ad hominem arguments allowed.

In my long life I've known plenty of assertive women and did a lot of overtime work myself. Known quite a few manipulative women too but again that is a different topic.

Not sure about living for ever but given good health both mental and physical I wouldn't mind a few extra years added to my life. Heaven does sound rather boring doesn't it.

 

Am I right to assume that these studies you're getting this stuff from don't really go into the many and complex reasons for why women "generally" behave this way and have a sexist attitude of themselves? That it is "just how women are," basically?

And this:

You've got to be kidding. Or maybe you need to get out more. Or maybe what passes for equality between sexes in your eyes is skewered by religion, or something.

 

I have never believed that women make 75% of what men make. I can't help but believe that the calculations are using faulty math and logic. In total this may be true as it is very likely that women go after lower paying jobs (think teaching), but that isn't the man's fault.

 

Of course it isn't the man's fault. It is never the man's fault. Women just weren't created agressive enough, physically strong enough or smart enough to compete with men. So it is our fault? Right? /scarcasm dripping all over the place.

 

You mean the "small" portion of American society that are single moms? Or do you mean like my wife, who has three kids and works an average of 11 hours a day? I'd like to see the real numbers, and how and who compiled this "data." In other words, what's your source, NOG?

Didn't you ever have any "male" teachers, TGS? I guess there must not be many women accountants in Boston these days - they all must be waitresses or "teachers," or some minor clerks.

 

TGS: Every year the American Chemical Society lists salaries for chemists. It is based on a survey of thousands of chemists in all different areas of the field. Women with identical experience levels have consistently made less than men in all areas of chemistry.

 

Since I was around in the 40's 50's, 60's and 70's I actually saw first hand what happened then. Spoke to some of the leaders of the Women's Fight for Equality Rights. Read a few of their books.

My mother was a single mom who struggle to provide for us. Not much in the way of welfare in those days and even if there had been I doubt she would have relied on it. She did the exact same work as men and got half the pay.

Economics was a driving force in this equal rights movement. During WWII many women entered the work force for the simple reason that there weren't enough men to do it. The men were busy fighting. Women also entered the military force doing all the traditional female jobs up to and including flying transport planes. Some, especially nurses, ended up in combat zones even though considered non-combatants. Some got killed.

Equal Rights means exactly that. Equal pay for equal work at whatever level. Equal opportunity to be given a job you are qualified for.

After the war ended women were expected to return to the kitchen and baby manufacturing but a lot of women had found they liked working for pay or just plain enjoyed their jobs. They did feel it was rather unfair that a man would get paid twice as much for the same job and gradually the Woman's movement was born.

Now I don't agree with everything that was done but a lot of good was achieved. Being a Homemaker, wife and mother, is a job and a hard job and I was disappointed that so many feminists looked down on it and those who wanted to follow that career line.

Men and women are not the same and "Viva la difference" but that pay difference was totally unfair and non-negotiable. So came the protests. It saddens me that it still exists. It angers me that double standards still exists and it infuriates me when someone, usually male, tries to blame it on the woman.

I have forgotten who first thought up that "A woman has too be twice as good as a man in order to be thought half as good" statement but it is still true.

Be feminine and you get shoved into the background because you aren't as 'aggressive' as man. You'll get accused of being manipulative and using your feminine wiles to get ahead. Which brings up sexual harassment but that, of course, is all the woman's fault .

If a woman is assertive and demands her rights then there are other names for her. "Why can't a woman be more like a man?" Why should she, can't each individual, female or male, be themselves. Styreotypes lump people into categories that create unfairness. Statistics may have its uses but if we loose sight of individuals someone is going to get hurt.

Not every man is going to become CEO or even top management in a company. So why is it that woman have to aim for that in order to get treated as an equal? A teacher from Kindergarten to Doctrinal level should be paid according to his/her work, knowledge and experience not according to whether or not the person is male or female.

 

I will take you at your word, but this to me says there may be something wrong with chemists. Maybe my industry (public accounting) or my state (Massachusetts) is more enlightened. I am at one of the largest firms in the state and all of our incoming classes are hired at the same payrate. It doesn't matter what sex they are or even where they get their degree.

This made me think of another point. After the initial hiring, I doubt we have two people who make the same amount. Maybe I'm naive, but I believe the salaries are based on the "perceived value" of the person to the firm combined with the negotiating skills of the employee.

Getting back to the chemists. Are we to believe that there is "institutional sexism" in the field of chemistry? I find that hard to believe. I also do not believe that in the field of chemistry men are instrinsically smarter then women and therefore more valuable. If that is the case, maybe the point is that women are not as good at negotiating. If that is true, whose fault is it? Is it anyone's fault? Should the government set salaries to protect those who are "weak at negotiating"? I can think of a couple of male "wallflowers" at my office that would probably benefit form this. Of course, I would be opposed to it as I recently negotiated a huge pay raise for myself, so I must therefore be one of the "strong negotiators".

Doesn't it seem to be implied by women that if they aren't making as much as a man that it must be the man's fault. Your post is also one of the reasons I'm leading the charge for this smiley

I'm not sure that is what equal rights mean. At least the last time I checked an employer is allowed to offer an employee a wage. If the employee doesn't like it they don't have to take the job. If a woman (or a man) feels they are being underpaid they have the right to find a new place of employment. This is harder to do when times are tough, but that is irrelevant as times are not always tough. An employer also has the right to hire the employee they want to. People do not have a right to a job. They have to convince someone to give them that job.

Not a very good example. Considering that almost all teaching jobs are union it is a profession that is almost the exact opposite of what you want. Everyone gets paid based on their "time served' and level of degree. What does it mean that teaching is primarily a female profession and there is no negotiations in regards to salary? Makes you think, doesn't it?

 

It seems like what you're saying here is, if an employer hires a man for a given salary, and then a woman of identical age, experience, qualification and aptitude applies for an identical position, the employer will have already treated her to "equal rights" by merely offering her a wage and it is therefore his prerogative to pay her less if he feels like it. And if the woman feels she's being treated unfairly, she can just bugger off and look for a job somewhere else. Have I read you right?

If yes, then...how is that not discrimination on the basis of sex, which is (in most states) illegal?

Subpoint: this is also part of the reason why the number values of people's salaries are so closely guarded - and discouraged from being discussed with fellow employees - in the corporate world. If people don't realize they're being underpaid compared to their peers...

 

http://www.now.org/issues/economic/factsheet.html

Thank you, DR.

Discussions of this nature tend to focus on the jobs that require higher education. Yes, things have improved since the 1960s. The wage gap has decreased by about 1 penny each year.

 

That's obvious.

I was recruited. So they convinced me to work for them, as are many people.

You are naive, but only because you have not seen a lot first hand. I've seen sales mgrs delete emails, shred documents and lie in order to cover up their discrimination against people for a variety of reasons. For instance, I had one sales manager (an ex-marine) tell that he would never hire a female for a particular position in a store because he needed "a man-of-war" in that postition (one of the top paying postitions). But he ended up being re-activated and sent to Iraq (there is justice). Contrary to what you may believe there are laws that protect people against exactly that kind of discrimination. Employers are not "free" to break the laws of the land, TGS. All people are equal under the law, at least in theory.

BTA - Dr. Warren Farrell has his own agenda. And I am always suspicious of anyone with a personal "cause." While he is a Democrat, he believes that the Democratic Party has been "captured" by the "feminist movement." He feels that the gender war has turned against men. That is interesting, and I'm not sure if he is right or wrong in that regard. I would have to read his book and then look at an opposing viewpiont to understand him and his ideas more fully.

 

Teaching does leap into my mind because so many of the feminists of the 60s and 70s were teachers. They were paid significantly less than male teachers. They negotiated on the picket line and did achieve quite a bit. As far as teaching being a female profession someone else has already pointed out that this is not true.

Grade School, prekindergarten to sixth grade may be dominated by women but that ceases to be true in high-school and college. If I am wrong this is one time I would like statistics that prove me wrong.

If two people, one female, one male, equally qualified apply for the same position and the man is offered $27.50 per hr and the woman is offered $23.50 per hr this is discrimination. The potential employer is perceiving the value of the potential employee from a sexist point of view and not the actual value of the employee.

And please let us not focus just on the jobs that require advanced education. Even in unions descripancies exist.

I worked in accounting and I know that my supervisors were given a certain amount of discretion in how much of a raise they could give.

 

Here are just some of the jobs were women earn more than men on average
http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi_paytable/index.htm
Some of them are rather strange.

You also have to look at some of the jobs that men are more willing to do than women(again, not all women, & studies have shown that women that do take these jobs actually make more than the men)

Also women are gaining every year, once there are enough women in these higher paying job positions then the gap may even go the other way overall. http://www.boston.com/news/educatio...6/02/women_gaining_on_men_in_advanced_fields/

As far as teachers go though, i have 2 nieces & a nephew that are teachers & the only difference in their starting pay was that one of the nieces makes more than the other 2 because she teaches at a title 1 school(she started out making $6,000 more). It's a way that the states & feds have used to try to get better trained teachers to go to the needier schools.

As others have said there are many factors leading to the wage gap & most of them are not necessarily sexist in nature.

 

Whine whine whine. Trying to tout the 'wage gap' as evidence that sexism is inherent in the work force is logically fallicious. Other factors such as performance, qualifications, assertiveness, experience, time spent with the company, willingness to kiss ass, propensity to take overtime/leave, and whether you prioritise family over work, all could explain the wage gap.

But nahhh, much easier to blame men. Because when the chips are down, it's always convenient to blame someone, *anyone*, else.

 

Of course it's easier to blame somebody else! That's what the human race does

I had to write a paper on the gender pay gap for a law exam a few years ago and I found that us women tend not to push for a bigger salary. We tend to think 'If I show them how good I am, I'll get the extra pay'

Saying that, I was once made a manager becaue they needed a token woman...I was actually told this by the guy who promoted me. It totally backfired on him though because I was then promoted above him and ended up firing him (not for his attitude, I found certain evidence to show that company funds were being 'mis-laid').

The problem with the gender pay gap for me is that women don't want to push themselves forward for fear of being seen as a cold hearted ***** who is unable to focus on anything other than their career. It's a totally stupid attitude as well. There's nothing wrong with being pushy. I run my own business now so I have to push things forward. Everyone whose opinion matters to me knows that at home I'm a stay at home mummy and the rest of the people don;t matter. If my clients think that I'm pushy then at least they know I'll get the job done for them!

(This post was brought to you by a lack of sense and the number 0 cups of coffee)