First White House report on women in America finds gender inequality alive and well - Polidicks

[url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/white-house-issues-report-on-women-in-america/]Source[/url] [release][quote][tab]Sadly for them, that's never gonna happen.[/tab][img]http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2009/03/09/feminism_EoBkm_19672.gif[/img][/quote] Women have higher graduation rates than men at all academic levels and by 2019 they are projected to account for 60 percent of all American undergraduates. In 2009, they accounted for more than half of all people employed in management and professional occupations. But at all levels of education, women still earn only 75 percent of what men earn. Those are among the nuggets contained in a new statistical compendium, Women in America, released on Tuesday by the White House. Obama administration officials say it is the first comprehensive look at the status of women in America since the Kennedy administration released a similar report in 1963. White House officials concede there is nothing new in the report. Rather, it is a compilation of data that paints a statistical portrait of changes in the social and economic lives of women over the past several decades. Valerie Jarrett, the president’s senior adviser and chairwoman of the White House Council on Women and Girls, said administration officials would use the document to guide policy-making. New or not, for those who follow societal trends, the report contains interesting charts and tidbits, offering a kind of one-stop shopping for data on women. It notes, for instance, that women are more likely to live alone than men, are less likely than in the past to suffer from violent crimes — including homicide — and continue to live longer than men. But the life expectancy gap is decreasing. And as they grow older, women are 40 percent more likely than men to report difficulty walking, a major indicator of general good health. Isabel Sawhill, who co-directs the Center on Children and Families at The Brookings Institution, a research organization here, said she viewed the document as a ‘’wake-up call’’ – a reminder that “despite tremendous educational progress and their large scale entry into the workforce’’ women are still lagging behind men when it comes to their paychecks. You can find the full report here: [url]http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/Women_in_America.pdf[/url][/release] Really interesting report... looking forward to read some of the opinions of the women on FP. [editline]2nd March 2011[/editline] [I][Insert misogynist pun here][/I]

it shouldn't go by gender, it should go by what the person is capable of if you're a weak little feeble man/woman trying to be a firefighter and you're clearly not capable then your pay shouldn't be higher then the people who can do it well

The fact that there's still such a major pay discrepancy is pretty messed up. And prepare for the influx of the ton of FP misogynists.

[QUOTE=ThePutty;28380036]it shouldn't go by gender, it should go by what the person is capable of if you're a weak little feeble man/woman trying to be a firefighter and you're clearly not capable then your pay shouldn't be higher then the people who can do it well[/QUOTE] Yeah that'd be one case, where men are usually more fitting to that job. But compare 2 people, 1 man and 1 woman who have the same resume... even on a simple office desk job, the man is very likely to be paid more than the woman.

Is this that kind of thing where they individually earn less on average despite doing the same type and level of work? Or the other thing where the average earnings of each gender in each group is taken into account and when there's a gap it's sexism.

Not trying to contest the validity of the report, but does this apparent gap in payment include hours worked? I'm under the impression women work more part-time than men, thus total earned money per month/year can differ from men who may work more hours.

[QUOTE=DarkWolf2;28380508]Not trying to contest the validity of the report, but does this apparent gap in payment include hours worked? I'm under the impression women work more part-time than men, thus total earned money per month/year can differ from men who may work more hours.[/QUOTE] It's compared so both men and women have the same amount of working hours in the same positions. One of the main reasons that women are paid less is due to pregnancies and the maternity leaves that follows. The company cannot fire a woman if she's pregnant, I believe, and so she gets paid for giving the company absolutely nothing while she's off caring for her child. So basically women are collectively punished for doing what is the most natural meaning of life.

I'm all in for sex equity. But it's funny how us men practically say it's [b]ok[/b] for women to be equal. We'd have the physical power to do that, but luckily we don't.

[QUOTE=Kagrs;28380562]One of the main reasons that women are paid less is due to pregnancies and the maternity leaves that follows.[/QUOTE] A few months isn't enough to skew the data and by the way, fathers can go on paternity leave as well So you're just talking out of your ass

lol equality

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28380868]A few months isn't enough to skew the data and by the way, fathers can go on paternity leave as well So you're just talking out of your ass[/QUOTE] It is true that employers do weight their employment recruiting taking into account that women are more likely to take months of paid leave for maternity. This difference in recruiting, rather than the time off itself, could be weighting the study.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28380868]A few months isn't enough to skew the data and by the way, fathers can go on paternity leave as well So you're just talking out of your ass[/QUOTE] If you're referring to the data in the study, then I already made it clear that the comparisons are made with thought what is on your paycheck for the same amount of hours in the same position, not what the average pay is and not without considering equal amounts of hours. TrouserDemon pretty much says the rest. Women are more likely to go on a paid leave than men, and companies are aware of this when they're hiring.

[QUOTE=Kagrs;28381039]Women are more likely to go on a paid leave than men, and companies are aware of this when they're hiring.[/QUOTE] Doesn't give them the right to do it.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28381053]Doesn't give them the right to do it.[/QUOTE] I agree, but if I had to choose between two equal candidates, only one of them was was much more likely to take leave should a child enter their lives, I'd pick the one that wasn't.

Of course, it's unfair and I'm definitely going to be pretty pissed around the first of every month once I'm on the job market. I never said it was okay, I was simply showing the reason why companies chose to do it. It's not really because they're sexist by personal opinion, they're sexist by focusing on capital. It's dumb, but that's business. So glad I'm not gonna be in a classic office environment.

[QUOTE=Kagrs;28381226]Of course, it's unfair and I'm definitely going to be pretty pissed around the first of every month once I'm on the job market. I never said it was okay, I was simply showing the reason why companies chose to do it. It's not really because they're sexist by personal opinion, they're sexist by focusing on capital. It's dumb, but that's business. So glad I'm not gonna be in a classic office environment.[/QUOTE] I don't think they qualify as being sexist at all if their reasoning for hiring a man is the one you've mentioned.

While pay should be equal, I find the idea of equality hard when he have such pervasive double standards.

THEY JUST FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS INEQUALITY?! What was the White House doing all this time? Having pizza parties and laser tag fights on the White House lawn?

Sorry. Accidental double post.

[QUOTE=cqbcat;28386318]THEY JUST FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS INEQUALITY?! What was the White House doing all this time? Having pizza parties and laser tag fights on the White House lawn?[/QUOTE] They were too busy fighting the war on terror, IIRC :v:

[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;28386425]They were too busy fighting the war on terror, IIRC :v:[/QUOTE] So, basically the same as laser tag fights, and pizza parties.