Workplace Salaries: At Last, Women on Top

[NobleSavage]

The fact that the average American working woman earns only about 8o% of what the average American working man earns has been something of a festering sore for at least half the population for several decades. And despite many programs and analyses and hand-wringing and badges and even some legislation, the figure hasn't budged much in the past five years.

But now there's evidence that the ship may finally be turning around: according to a new analysis of 2,000 communities by a market research company, in 147 out of 150 of the biggest cities in the U.S., the median full-time salaries of young women are 8% higher than those of the guys in their peer group. In two cities, Atlanta and Memphis, those women are making about 20% more. This squares with earlier research from Queens College, New York, that had suggested that this was happening in major metropolises. But the new study suggests that the gap is bigger than previously thought, with young women in New York City, Los Angeles and San Diego making 17%, 12% and 15% more than their male peers, respectively. And it also holds true even in reasonably small areas like the Raleigh-Durham region and Charlotte in North Carolina (both 14% more), and Jacksonville, Fla. (6%).

Here's the slightly deflating caveat: this reverse gender gap, as it's known, applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities. The rest of working women — even those of the same age, but who are married or don't live in a major metropolitan area — are still on the less scenic side of the wage divide.

http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

 

[Derec]

Another case of double standards - if men make more money than women, that's bad and an example of patriarchy. If women make more money than men, that's good and progressive.
Kind of like college. If there are more men than women in college, that's bad and only due to patriarchy. If there are more women than men than that's good and must be because women are smarter. Can't have to do with affirmative action or abundance of female-only scholarships and grants

 

[laughing dog]

Personally, I enjoy a woman on top.

 

[Elixir]

Personally, I enjoy a woman on top.

Well, don't we all? For true equality though, I want to be paid to get laid.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Personally, I enjoy a woman on top.

Well, don't we all? For true equality though, I want to be paid to get laid.

But it's always going to be easier for a woman to get free sex than a man. Therefore, our society will never be truly equal until the government gives us guys a couple hundred bucks in the name of gender equality everytime we bang some chick. Even if she's a fattie.

 

[Bronzeage]

Personally, I enjoy a woman on top.

Well, don't we all? For true equality though, I want to be paid to get laid.

But it's always going to be easier for a woman to get free sex than a man. Therefore, our society will never be truly equal until the government gives us guys a couple hundred bucks in the name of gender equality everytime we bang some chick. Even if she's a fattie.

Canadian or US dollars?

 

[fromderinside]

Another case of double standards - if men make more money than women, that's bad and an example of patriarchy. If women make more money than men, that's good and progressive.

....

That's what you are reading?

What I'm reading is that good looking urban single women are worth more than good looking single men to those who evaluate them who happen to usually be older men. Could be a sexual baiting of the hook thing since if the good looking urban women are married men get more.

 

[Rhea]

Another case of double standards - if men make more money than women, that's bad and an example of patriarchy. If women make more money than men, that's good and progressive.
Kind of like college. If there are more men than women in college, that's bad and only due to patriarchy. If there are more women than men than that's good and must be because women are smarter. Can't have to do with affirmative action or abundance of female-only scholarships and grants

I think you missed the main message of the OP.

 

[Derec]

That's what you are reading?

Yes. The "at last" at the very least indicates an approval and agreement with matriarchy.

What I'm reading is that good looking urban single women are worth more than good looking single men to those who evaluate them who happen to usually be older men. Could be a sexual baiting of the hook thing since if the good looking urban women are married men get more.

Well married people are on average older and more experienced than unmarried ones but married women are more likely than married men to take years off work. So that part is explainable with things other than sexism. But unmarried women making more money than unmarried men is, as you seem to agree, due to sexism. Why you approve of such sexism is quite another matter.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you missed the main message of the OP.

Which is, in your opinion what exactly? That sexism is ok as long as it favors women?

 

[doubtingt]

I think you missed the main message of the OP.

Which is, in your opinion what exactly? That sexism is ok as long as it favors women?

Derec, try reading the very short article. The gap favoring women is due to women in big cities being 50% more likely to have a college degree, and 100% more likely among ethnic minorities that are more prevalent in these cities.

The figures come from James Chung of Reach Advisors, who has spent more than a year analyzing data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey. He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do.
........
Hispanic and black women are twice as likely to graduate from college as their male peers.
.......
Significantly, the conditions that are feeding the rise in female wages — a growing knowledge-based economy, the decline of a manufacturing base and an increasing minority population

Note the the overall gap favoring men is NOT due to education, since studies showing this gap control for education and control for college major (not to mention that women do better in college).

 

[Derec]

Derec, try reading the very short article. The gap favoring women is due to women in big cities being 50% more likely to have a college degree, and 100% more likely among ethnic minorities that are more prevalent in these cities.

That's not what the person I was responding to was saying. Besides, how is it good for women to be more likely to have a college degree? Any statistic where men are on top is used as an example of the oppressiveness of the patriarchy whereas any statistic where women are on top is claimed as evidence for inherent superiority of women. What is ignored is that women have been on the receiving end of all kinds of preferential treatment for the last 40 years - when it comes to hiring, college admissions, money, feminizing the work/college environment etc.

The figures come from James Chung of Reach Advisors, who has spent more than a year analyzing data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey. He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do.

Easy when male college students are discriminated against every step of the way. Hell, if a male student and a female student are in direct competition for a spot or funding all she has to do is falsely accuse him of raping her and he is a goner. That is in addition to all the affirmative action that favors women and all the female only scholarships and grants.

Note the the overall gap favoring men is NOT due to education, since studies showing this gap control for education and control for college major

No, they do not. The infamous 73% figure does not adjust for anything.

(not to mention that women do better in college).

Only because they are privileged every step of the way, from admissions, through scholarships/grants to all sorts of women-only resources.

 

[laughing dog]

Only because they are privileged every step of the way, from admissions, through scholarships/grants to all sorts of women-only resources.

With all due respect, you really have no clue. Where I teach, the institution has historically had more women students than men students (and still does). It is laughable to claim the women students are privileged every step of the way.

 

[Derec]

Only because they are privileged every step of the way, from admissions, through scholarships/grants to all sorts of women-only resources.

With all due respect, you really have no clue. Where I teach, the institution has historically had more women students than men students (and still does). It is laughable to claim the women students are privileged every step of the way.

Are men beneficiaries of affirmative action programs?
Are men able to get advantage of loads of men-only scholarships and grants, including NSF grants?
Are there men-only resources on campuses?
No, all these advantages belong to women.

 

[doubtingt]

That's not what the person I was responding to was saying. Besides, how is it good for women to be more likely to have a college degree? Any statistic where men are on top is used as an example of the oppressiveness of the patriarchy whereas any statistic where women are on top is claimed as evidence for inherent superiority of women. What is ignored is that women have been on the receiving end of all kinds of preferential treatment for the last 40 years - when it comes to hiring, college admissions, money, feminizing the work/college environment etc.

The figures come from James Chung of Reach Advisors, who has spent more than a year analyzing data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey. He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do.

Easy when male college students are discriminated against every step of the way. Hell, if a male student and a female student are in direct competition for a spot or funding all she has to do is falsely accuse him of raping her and he is a goner.

Please point to a single case where a woman in college has accused a man of rape while they were competing for the same funding. You can't point to one b/c it is unlikely to have ever happened and would need to have happened millions of times to account for the college data.

That is in addition to all the affirmative action that favors women and all the female only scholarships and grants.

How would that help them do better in high school too, which they do, and which accounts for most of their better performance in college.

The infamous 73% figure does not adjust for anything.

A significant gap favoring men still exists in almost every profession, even after adjusting for college.

(not to mention that women do better in college).

Only because they are privileged every step of the way, from admissions, through scholarships/grants to all sorts of women-only resources.

Wrong. First, getting special privileges at admissions would only hurt women's performance in college courses, because it would mean that more unqualified females are being admitted than unqualified males. Second, evidence shows that women are more intellectually prepared and motivated when they enter college. They have better high school gpa, take more college prep courses while in high school, are more likely to report during 8th grade that they plan to attend college, are more likely to apply to college, and take more college credits once they get into college.

 

[laughing dog]

Only because they are privileged every step of the way, from admissions, through scholarships/grants to all sorts of women-only resources.

With all due respect, you really have no clue. Where I teach, the institution has historically had more women students than men students (and still does). It is laughable to claim the women students are privileged every step of the way.

Are men beneficiaries of affirmative action programs?
Are men able to get advantage of loads of men-only scholarships and grants, including NSF grants?
Are there men-only resources on campuses?
No, all these advantages belong to women.

None of that addressed what I wrote. None of it.

I know of no woman who gets football scholarships. And until Title IX, there were boatloads more men-only scholarships and grants. And, men are sometimes beneficiaries of AA programs.

More importantly, for some reason, you appear think that any woman student on a campus is somehow there because of privilege at every step along the way.

 

[Derec]

None of that addressed what I wrote. None of it.

Of course it does.

I know of no woman who gets football scholarships. And until Title IX, there were boatloads more men-only scholarships and grants.

They get other sports scholarships and because of Title IX there can't be more male sports scholarships than female ones even if there are more men interested in athletic programs than women. And of course, Title IX doesn't prohibit all the female only scholarships. In other words, it's very one-sided - women't can't be discriminated against, but men can.

And, men are sometimes beneficiaries of AA programs.

Nonsense.

More importantly, for some reason, you appear think that any woman student on a campus is somehow there because of privilege at every step along the way.

Not any female student, but the reason there are more female than male students.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course it does.

Really, it doesn't.

They get other sports scholarships and because of Title IX there can't be more male sports scholarships than female ones even if there are more men interested in athletic programs than women. And of course, Title IX doesn't prohibit all the female only scholarships. In other words, it's very one-sided - women't can't be discriminated against, but men can.

You are misinformed. Title IX does not mandate that there cannot be more male sports scholarships than female ones. It says the scholarships by gender need to approximately proportional to the gender proportions in the student body.

Nonsense.

Oh, you don't think black men are benefiaries of AA programs sometimes?

Not any female student, but the reason there are more female than male students.

Prove it. My institution has been more female than male (roughly 55 to 60% female) for over 80 years. And as doubtingt explained above, if that were true, female performance would be worse not better than male performance.

 

[Metaphor]

Wrong. First, getting special privileges at admissions would only hurt women's performance in college courses, because it would mean that more unqualified females are being admitted than unqualified males. Second, evidence shows that women are more intellectually prepared and motivated when they enter college. They have better high school gpa, take more college prep courses while in high school, are more likely to report during 8th grade that they plan to attend college, are more likely to apply to college, and take more college credits once they get into college.

But as I've been told in the affirmative action threads, being intellectually prepared and motivated for university is just evidence of privilege. Taking prep courses is just privilege. A higher GPA is just privilege. And who wants to perpetuate privilege?