No, Women Don't Earn Less Than Men

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The bogus stat that will not die...

www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/01/no-women-don-t-make-less-money-than-men.html

President Obama repeated the spurious gender wage gap statistic in his State of the Union address. “Today,” he said, “women make up about half our workforce. But they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.”

What is wrong and embarrassing is the President of the United States reciting a massively discredited factoid.

...

In its fact-checking column on the State of the Union, the Washington Post included the president’s mention of the wage gap in its list of dubious claims. “There is clearly a wage gap, but differences in the life choices of men and women… make it difficult to make simple comparisons.”

Consider, for example, how men and women differ in their college majors. Here is a list (PDF) of the ten most remunerative majors compiled by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Men overwhelmingly outnumber women in all but one of them:

1. Petroleum Engineering: 87% male
2. Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Sciences and Administration: 48% male
3. Mathematics and Computer Science: 67% male
4. Aerospace Engineering: 88% male
5. Chemical Engineering: 72% male
6. Electrical Engineering: 89% male
7. Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering: 97% male
8. Mechanical Engineering: 90% male
9. Metallurgical Engineering: 83% male
10. Mining and Mineral Engineering: 90% male

And here are the 10 least remunerative majors—where women prevail in nine out of ten:

1. Counseling Psychology: 74% female
2. Early Childhood Education: 97% female
3. Theology and Religious Vocations: 34% female
4. Human Services and Community Organization: 81% female
5. Social Work: 88% female
6. Drama and Theater Arts: 60% female
7. Studio Arts: 66% female
8. Communication Disorders Sciences and Services: 94% female
9. Visual and Performing Arts: 77% female
10. Health and Medical Preparatory Programs: 55% female

Much of the wage gap can be explained away by simply taking account of college majors. Early childhood educators and social workers can expect to earn around $36,000 and $39,000, respectively. By contrast, petroleum engineering and metallurgy degrees promise median earnings of $120,000 and $80,000

[Opti]

Really, and you base that on generic info above?

[Shooby]

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

[Opti]

engineering.purdue.edu/~lhj/

Jamieson is currently President of the IEEE Foundation.



Jamieson served as the 2007 IEEE President.

Jamieson was 2005 Vice President for Publication Services and Products. She was 2003 IEEE Vice President for Technical Activities and created IEEE's Focus on Technologies initiative.� In 2010 and 2011, she served as Director of Strategic Planning for IEEE Educational Activities.

She was 1998-1999 President of the IEEE Signal Processing Society . Two President's Columns from the IEEE Signal Processing Magazine (July 1999 and (September 1999) have discussed the issue of women in engineering and signal processing


Maybe you can ask her.

Optimist Purdue BSEE 1982
Purdue MSEE 1985

[kilroy]

Shooby, does it take 2 hands to hold that broad brush with which you like to paint all "liberals"?   I'm sure the same could be done to all "conservatives", and then you'd be screaming about stereotypes and posting one of these

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Feb 2, 2014 11:27:14 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

Liberalism is a religion, and this is dogma.  It's hardly arguable.  And that "generic info" is highly relevant FACT, but you can't go against orthodoxy or you are scourged, burned at the stake, dunked and otherwise tortured until you confess your sins and convert.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 11:27:14 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

of course it matters.

look, i will admit that liberals take these "truths" as sacred, and do paltry little analysis of them.  i will admit that they repeat them endlessly, even though they are grossly distorted.

but i also disagree that disparity doesn't exist.  sure, it might not be 77 cents to the dollar, as Obama recently stated, but it sure could be 87-94 cents on the dollar. 

and the fact that low wage professions (and degrees, if you wish) are dominated by women is also a matter for public discussion.  why is that?  if you think about that fact for a minute, it arouses every bit as much of a debate as the "wage problem".

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 11:40:49 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Feb 2, 2014 11:27:14 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

Liberalism is a religion, and this is dogma. 

you're half right.  this is dogma.  and i really don't appreciate the fact that liberals don't do more thoughtful analysis on it.  the problem is that it has been repeated so often that nobody on the left questions it anymore. 

It's hardly arguable.  And that "generic info" is highly relevant FACT, but you can't go against orthodoxy or you are scourged, burned at the stake, dunked and otherwise tortured until you confess your sins and convert.

i would gladly convert if conservatives were any better.  unfortunately, they aren't.  so, i will stick with what i got, thanks.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

OK, dj's utter reasonableness today is confusing me. I don't know what to do with it? I might have to take a break for lunch.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 11:47:52 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

OK, dj's utter reasonableness today is confusing me. I don't know what to do with it? I might have to take a break for lunch.

seriously.  breakfast for me.  l8rs. 

[Shooby]

There are often reasons WHY women earn less as well. Some women want more family friendly jobs and thus turn down promotions and things like that which may require more time.

[Miss Tequila]

Feb 2, 2014 12:18:56 GMT -5 Shooby said:

There are often reasons WHY women earn less as well. Some women want more family friendly jobs and thus turn down promotions and things like that which may require more time.

I've seen this a lot. I did it myself when my kids were younger. I took a flex schedule for a few years that I know put me in the mommy track. I couldn't travel like my colleagues because I didn't want to be away from my kids like that. Looking at the firm I left, there were quite a few women who went in some kind if does schedule after having kids (no travel, reduced schedule, flex schedule, or a combination of all 3). In my 17 years there I cannot remember one male doing any if that.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 12:36:46 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Feb 2, 2014 12:18:56 GMT -5 Shooby said:

There are often reasons WHY women earn less as well. Some women want more family friendly jobs and thus turn down promotions and things like that which may require more time.

I've seen this a lot. I did it myself when my kids were younger. I took a flex schedule for a few years that I know put me in the mommy track. I couldn't travel like my colleagues because I didn't want to be away from my kids like that. Looking at the firm I left, there were quite a few women who went in some kind if does schedule after having kids (no travel, reduced schedule, flex schedule, or a combination of all 3). In my 17 years there I cannot remember one male doing any if that.

men do this too, of course.  especially musicians.  they take temp work, or work afternoons so that they can up late playing, recording, and practicing.  but women do it far more often, due to traditional family roles and expectations.

[Shooby]

Yes. And, I kind of mommy tracked myself as well. The reality is that many women want to be home more with their children and the reality is that most couples like having mom home more than dad? If some don't, then fine but I wanted to be the one home as much as possible.

[Miss Tequila]

Feb 2, 2014 12:41:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Feb 2, 2014 12:36:46 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

I've seen this a lot. I did it myself when my kids were younger. I took a flex schedule for a few years that I know put me in the mommy track. I couldn't travel like my colleagues because I didn't want to be away from my kids like that. Looking at the firm I left, there were quite a few women who went in some kind if does schedule after having kids (no travel, reduced schedule, flex schedule, or a combination of all 3). In my 17 years there I cannot remember one male doing any if that.

men do this too, of course.  especially musicians.  they take temp work, or work afternoons so that they can up late playing, recording, and practicing.  but women do it far more often, due to traditional family roles and expectations.

Then why the uproar over women earning less?

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 12:53:02 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Feb 2, 2014 12:41:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

men do this too, of course.  especially musicians.  they take temp work, or work afternoons so that they can up late playing, recording, and practicing.  but women do it far more often, due to traditional family roles and expectations.

Then why the uproar over women earning less?

i think there are two reasons.  one is historical.  the problem of lower pay for equal work has certainly lessened over the years.  so, part of what is being trotted out is facts as they used to be being presented as facts as they are.

but the second, thornier reason is totally current: the fact that women gravitate toward degrees and jobs that are lower paying.  i think that we can have a healthy debate on why that is.  it can't be strength.  the highest paying professions are not manual labor professions.  it is not intelligence.  women are every bit as smart as men.  so that only leaves one thing: socialization.  women are socialized to choose lower paying career paths.  this is one of those things that requires deep introspection to deal with, which is arguably not a great American strength.  but personally, i would love to see that discussion, rather than the overly simplistic one that we are having.

[sesfw]

Then why the uproar over women earning less?

Because it's something people can complain about.  And politicians can pound the podium about.  When people want to get a point across they seldom put both sides of the story on the table.  Our preacher does this a lot and I've been around enough so my faith is solid for me.

Families choose what parent will be around for the kids, and mostly it's mom.  She is the one that gave birth, stayed home to care for infant/kids.  For most women life and mommy time get in the way of a high achieving career.  And most are OK with that until the kids are launched and mom discovers the empty nest.  Then mom is starting over in her fifties with a 20+ year old education, and competing with someone just starting out.

Age discrimination is alive and well.  Employers look at the gray/dyed hair, family wrinkles, resume with possible vacant spots, life experiences ......... and compare these with a fresh-faced just out of school with all the latest ideas.

Unfortunately it's a no brainer.

I realize single parents are a different category and have different goals.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Feb 2, 2014 12:42:46 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Yes. And, I kind of mommy tracked myself as well. The reality is that many women want to be home more with their children and the reality is that most couples like having mom home more than dad? If some don't, then fine but I wanted to be the one home as much as possible.

We have no qualms about who, but we do strongly believe that SOMEONE should be home.  We've done it both ways.  In my house-flipping days where my primary source of income was wholesale contract assignments to rehabbers / contractors I was the primary parent.  I didn't not work at all, but I was flexible whereas my wife had the 9 to 5ish gig.  Now, we both work from home and try to arrange our schedules so someone's always the "primary".  This doesn't mean we sit around the house with kids (I prefer full time parent, or primary parent to "SAH"), but it means for example even if our son is at school, a camp, or at a friend's house- someone is home and/or available.  That being said, now that I'm working more with the insurance adjusting / property inspection business- she's primary and we are both liking it a lot more with her in that role.

[billisonboard]

Feb 2, 2014 13:10:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

... women gravitate toward degrees and jobs that are lower paying. ...

Or are jobs that women have traditionally gravitated to lower paying?

[mmhmm]

Frankly, I think this situation is changing.  Women are more often found studying the hard sciences in University than they once were, just as more women are choosing to pursue careers as opposed to marrying and raising families.  As that demographic pushes forward, it will continue to narrow the margin between male and female salaries.

[Miss Tequila]

Feb 2, 2014 14:41:53 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Frankly, I think this situation is changing.  Women are more often found studying the hard sciences in University than they once were, just as more women are choosing to pursue careers as opposed to marrying and raising families.  As that demographic pushes forward, it will continue to narrow the margin between male and female salaries.

I can't speak for all careers but I know that accounting is now evenly split between women and men.

[moon/Laura]

I do believe women make less where I work. Granted, this is based on information from only 2 men, but one made nearly DOUBLE what I do, for the same job. I didn't find this out until he got laid off and we were talking about it. In this layoff, there were only 2 of us kept and after hearing what he was getting paid, I came to a firm belief that I was kept more because I was "cheap", than for my overall skill. Some (but not all) had better skills than I did at that time, so that reinforces my feelings that I was kept due to my lower salary.

Is that true everywhere? i'm sure it's not. but it's also not fair to say it's just "not true", period.

[Shooby]

Yes, I do think career choice is part of that. Women have tended to gravitate toward lower paying careers. But, women are now seeming to go to college in greater numbers than men. So, that is going to change over time.

[Virgil Showlion]

Feb 2, 2014 11:43:24 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Feb 2, 2014 11:27:14 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

of course it matters.

look, i will admit that liberals take these "truths" as sacred, and do paltry little analysis of them.  i will admit that they repeat them endlessly, even though they are grossly distorted.

but i also disagree that disparity doesn't exist.  sure, it might not be 77 cents to the dollar, as Obama recently stated, but it sure could be 87-94 cents on the dollar. 

and the fact that low wage professions (and degrees, if you wish) are dominated by women is also a matter for public discussion.  why is that?  if you think about that fact for a minute, it arouses every bit as much of a debate as the "wage problem".

[mmhmm]

Feb 2, 2014 14:46:13 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

I do believe women make less where I work. Granted, this is based on information from only 2 men, but one made nearly DOUBLE what I do, for the same job. I didn't find this out until he got laid off and we were talking about it. In this layoff, there were only 2 of us kept and after hearing what he was getting paid, I came to a firm belief that I was kept more because I was "cheap", than for my overall skill. Some (but not all) had better skills than I did at that time, so that reinforces my feelings that I was kept due to my lower salary.

Is that true everywhere? i'm sure it's not. but it's also not fair to say it's just "not true", period.

I've seen the same thing, moonbeam.  A lot depends, I think, on the business and the management of said business.  Change happens slowly and the status quo was (years ago) for women to do the clerical work, or the repetitive work, or the child-centered work, or the work of caregiving.  That was a barrier that had to be broken, and has been broken.  It's going to take time for the "old guard" to realize it's been broken and change their ways.  


We had a nursing supervisor position open at one time.  That position doesn't come open often and is always filled from inside.  We had one male and three females apply.  The male was the least qualified, overall, but that's who the boss wanted to hire despite the fact that he was asking for a higher salary.  The boss was also male.  Maybe he was just lonesome.  Whatever his reason, it didn't fly.  The rest of us pitched a fit and it went up the line.  The best qualified was hired.  It was a bit of an eye-opener, though, as nursing is one of the traditional "women's work" fields.        

[zibazinski]

I see women wising up to the "second shift" mentality.  I think DS has been dumped by more than a few good earning women because he didn't bring enough to the table and they weren't about to carry him. This has made him finally get his move on and make something more of himself. I wouldn't marry him either. DD has no intention of having kids and I don't blame her. Her career is going to be a demanding one that she is working hard and sacrificing a lot for. Mommy track isn't in her future.

[Deleted]

Feb 2, 2014 11:43:24 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Feb 2, 2014 11:27:14 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. It is part of the holy scriptures of liberalism. You just keep repeating these statements like a rosary over and over to get people to believe it whether it is true or not.

of course it matters.

look, i will admit that liberals take these "truths" as sacred, and do paltry little analysis of them.  i will admit that they repeat them endlessly, even though they are grossly distorted.

but i also disagree that disparity doesn't exist.  sure, it might not be 77 cents to the dollar, as Obama recently stated, but it sure could be 87-94 cents on the dollar. 

and the fact that low wage professions (and degrees, if you wish) are dominated by women is also a matter for public discussion.  why is that?  if you think about that fact for a minute, it arouses every bit as much of a debate as the "wage problem".

i would be interested in your opinion as to why women choose those careers more than others

i have my theories, but i will hold them for now

but as to the OP,women do earn slightly less than their male counterparts in exactly in sames jobs

my guesstimate would be 90-92 cents on the dollar

and until parents start teaching their daughters HOW TO NEGOTIATE it will remain that way from now to eternity

if you start at 42k compared to 45k for your male counterpart, and you both get equal raises throughout your career, you will be on the short end of the stick

very rarely do i have a female tell me no when i make them a salary offer......guys tell me no 80-85% of the time

they tell me they were thinking higher, and give me reasons why they are worth it

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

I can't speak for all careers but I know that accounting is now evenly split between women and men.

I worked in accounting - we were on an equal pay level as our male staff in accounting & tax auditing - it was a large Accounting firm - the only ones making the really big bucks were the partners - and even that was pretty even-split between male & female partners. This was around the '80's, 90's. I'm sure that it's even more evenly split in this decade.

Women are also getting (as mmhmm mentioned) into more scientific fields - such as medicine, or engineering.

I also worked for an engineering firm - and the female Engineers were equal on a pay scale to the males.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 17:24:24 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

Feb 2, 2014 11:43:24 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

of course it matters.

look, i will admit that liberals take these "truths" as sacred, and do paltry little analysis of them.  i will admit that they repeat them endlessly, even though they are grossly distorted.

but i also disagree that disparity doesn't exist.  sure, it might not be 77 cents to the dollar, as Obama recently stated, but it sure could be 87-94 cents on the dollar. 

and the fact that low wage professions (and degrees, if you wish) are dominated by women is also a matter for public discussion.  why is that?  if you think about that fact for a minute, it arouses every bit as much of a debate as the "wage problem".

i would be interested in your opinion as to why women choose those careers more than others

i speculated about that.  but since i was raised by a male parent in an all male household, and i have not studied this, i would prefer that women comment.

i have my theories, but i will hold them for now

but as to the OP,women do earn slightly less than their male counterparts in exactly in sames jobs

my guesstimate would be 90-92 cents on the dollar

that guesstimate is actually supported by considerable data.

and until parents start teaching their daughters HOW TO NEGOTIATE it will remain that way from now to eternity

if you start at 42k compared to 45k for your male counterpart, and you both get equal raises throughout your career, you will be on the short end of the stick

very rarely do i have a female tell me no when i make them a salary offer......guys tell me no 80-85% of the time

they tell me they were thinking higher, and give me reasons why they are worth it

interesting factoid.

[djAdvocate]

Feb 2, 2014 15:05:34 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Feb 2, 2014 14:46:13 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

I do believe women make less where I work. Granted, this is based on information from only 2 men, but one made nearly DOUBLE what I do, for the same job. I didn't find this out until he got laid off and we were talking about it. In this layoff, there were only 2 of us kept and after hearing what he was getting paid, I came to a firm belief that I was kept more because I was "cheap", than for my overall skill. Some (but not all) had better skills than I did at that time, so that reinforces my feelings that I was kept due to my lower salary.

Is that true everywhere? i'm sure it's not. but it's also not fair to say it's just "not true", period.

I've seen the same thing, moonbeam.  A lot depends, I think, on the business and the management of said business.  Change happens slowly and the status quo was (years ago) for women to do the clerical work, or the repetitive work, or the child-centered work, or the work of caregiving.  That was a barrier that had to be broken, and has been broken.  It's going to take time for the "old guard" to realize it's been broken and change their ways.  


We had a nursing supervisor position open at one time.  That position doesn't come open often and is always filled from inside.  We had one male and three females apply.  The male was the least qualified, overall, but that's who the boss wanted to hire despite the fact that he was asking for a higher salary.  The boss was also male.  Maybe he was just lonesome.  Whatever his reason, it didn't fly.  The rest of us pitched a fit and it went up the line.  The best qualified was hired.  It was a bit of an eye-opener, though, as nursing is one of the traditional "women's work" fields.        

this post might explain everything, or it might just be a coincidence.