Is Gender Discrimination the Main Reason Women Are Paid Less Than Men?

No way, it is because they are the weaker and stupider sex....



DD

 

Men run the world so they make the most money. I mean who wants to watch the wnba.

 

honestly I think women are more likely to make career choices that enable them to physcially care for the family and men are more likely to make career choices that enable them to financially provide for the family.

A woman is more likely to take a job closer to home to make sure the kids are picked up on time etc... a man is more likely to commute a little further to make sure he can pay for braces / collegge etc....

 

I don't think i've ever had a job where women who were on the same level with men, made less than the men on that level. now is there a glass ceiling, that's another question

 

I don't think so. I think the main reason is that men will make more commitments (due to additional freedom, drive, or necessity) to the company than women will, on the margin. Women take more breaks from working due to pregnancy and childrearing (they are also more likely to care for elderly or do other non-career tasks). Women do less overtime because of childcare needs. Bosses perceive men to be more reliable on issues of time and feel they can be used after hours because they have fewer time-sensitive child care responsibilities. Women can't take business trips as easily as men for the same reason. With all these things, men build up more experience, more trust, and more value more quickly than women do and are paid better as a result of the actual human capital they can offer. I'd expect to see a lot of parity between out-of-college-hires and then increasing disparity in more experienced sets.

I'm sure there is some unconscious discrimination there too, and some gender-related effects in the home as I've described. But, I wouldn't put the blame on employers.

 

It's quite simple. Women become crazy and bleed out of their bajingos for a few days every month until they're too old to really contribute to the workforce. Add that up over the course of several years and that's a lot of hours of production lost. That's why they get paid less.

 

The main reason is women aren't as smart as men.

 

Working leads to chipped nails and to their propensity of getting headaches easy.

Sums things up nicely.

Strong and aggressive generally beats delicateness and frailty, thats just how it is...nothing much we can do to change that. The passive/aggressive thing women have mastered seems to be working greatly, so the "natural disadvantage" isnt as wide as its made out to be.

As a whole women havent still fully adapted to, or really dont even want to be, the role of primary wage earner. If they figure from the start they're making the money AND FULLY controlling it, itd probably factor into how they approach work and pay. Instead of just being in a job buying their time until they marry a primary wage earner.

 

I agree with you. For the most part, same job and seniority means equal pay. Discrimination in hiring and promoting is a bigger story.

To answer the question, I do not believe workplace discrimination is the main reason women earn less than men.

 

My dealership, and most others, hire only pretty women to be in the presence of the customers.
Many of those are probably hoping that a rich man will take them away...

Seriously, of all the most important jobs, what can a woman do that a man cannot? Not much. What can a man do, that a woman cannot? Many things. (Think of the general population, not a few oddballs...).

 

in maybe 95 out of 100 instances, i want a dude over a chick taking care of things business-wise.......just about the only stations i would prefer a woman are for like haircuts, masseuse, maid, HR rep, flight attendant, restaurant hostess, etc........and even in said restaurant, i'd still prefer a dude waiter to take my order and a dude chef to prepare my dishes.....there's just less chance of things getting screwed up when a guy is handling the task...

 

I hope some of you are kidding.

There have been numerous studies and reports on this and women are still generally around 70 cents to the man's dollar. Of course, that is across the boards so the jobs are not always the same. I have even read studies that show that men are more likely to get raises they ask for than women. I think the only thing that is in a woman's favor in the business world is if they threaten to sue - those numbers are strongly on the woman's side as far as getting the company to do something. In the corporate world there absolutely is a glass ceiling and there absolutely is wage disparity for the same position. And, yes, women do get penalized for getting pregnant...even though that is supposed to be illegal.

 

Women don't function as well in a corporate environment so they get paid accordingly. If cleaning the house and making sandwiches paid a six-figure salary then it would be a different story.





Honestly though women have to work much harder to move up the corporate ladder. That's why most women I know that have high positions in a company are b****es. It's because they feel like they have something to prove, and for the most part they are right.

 

Thank goodness you made a sensible post in this wilderness of a thread. I was thinking I would have to do a search and repeat my own opinions about gender discrimination posted here in the past. Kudos... needless to say, I agree with you. I have to assume that many here have limited experience in the workplace, are relatively young, and are men. A safe assumption.



Impeach Bush.

 

I agree with this.

And just from personal experience, there have been plenty of women working at higher level than me in every corporate job I've had.

 

it is my experience that most females are emotionally unstable.

that said... women in the workplace who demostrate patience as well as discretion are paid just as well and promoted just as quickly.

 

if they paid public school teachers more i think that 70 cents figure would go way up.

 

If its all about the bottom line dollar, why dont employers hire women instead of men? 30% LESS payroll cost will have a company thinking of exporting jobs to China or hiring illegals. Hiring women is a far less involved move than that.

If a company has a female majority workforce in the above fashion and a man tries to apply, would they pay the man 30% more than the females simply because he's male? Does a woman with 10 years experience at a job, see the man next to her similarly working 10 years in the same job role get paid 30% MORE than her?I find any of that hard to believe.

There is the fact that a woman stands to have pay withheld more than a man if their settings are similar - That men's pay is "market rate" and you can "mark off" from there in regards to women's pay, though men might be "exempt" from a mark-off. But everyone applying for work stands to get lowballed from a company. If you're well dressed or sloppily dressed, good looking or ugly, frumpy, tattooed, "ethnic", young or old, have good speaking skills or speak with a stutter or lisp, different things can affect pay.

But it appears mothers for whatever reason get it the worst across the boards.

 

Wow. Is it like the 1970s in here or what? This is the most backasswards thread I've read in this forum in, maybe, forever.

Child rearing is an issue here? Seriously? In 2008? How many babies is any woman likely to have? Two? Three? Four? In a lot of cases none. In the case of a pregancy, the woman carries the baby, sure. That means that, barring complications, a woman needs like one month on either side of a pregnancy max. That's it. And given how rare pregnancies are in any woman's life, that's not an unreasonable vacation time regardless of gender in a valued employee.

After the baby's born and the mother's recovered, why is it assumed that the mother should take more responsibility for the child's needs than the father? That kind of thinking is backwards. And nuts.

Unless the mother is a single mother and the father's out of the picture, once the mother is out of the hospital there is no reason at all she needs to be home with a baby more than the father does.