I’m glad I’ve got one, and I’m so proud that my worth is enhanced by my testicles, as this report from Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce shows.
The findings are stark: Women earn less at all degree levels, even when they work as much as men. On average, women who work full-time, full-year earn 25 percent less than men, even at similar education levels. At all levels of educational attainment, African Americans and Latinos earn less than Whites.
I have to thank Carl Zimmer for bringing that to my attention — when he isn’t writing about parasites and viruses, he also dabbles in other heartwarming subjects, like this.
(Also on Sb)
What’s also cool is that I can now put a price on them: a pair of testicles is worth a million dollars more than a pair of ovaries.
Maybe it’s because I’m a woman but this is old news…really old news. But I suppose most men still haven’t noticed that they are the privileged class because they spend so much energy complaining about their diminishing power. So silly!
Thank you for bringing this to the attention of everyone else who will most likely ignore it or find one or two women who outearn men and then disqualify this entire study.
Is this a way of stress-testing the new server PZ ? Only you know that when the MRA loons turn up in about 10 comments the comment count is going to hit a 1000 within a few hours.
Think of Ed! Next time he gets his gun out to shoot something, it won’t be a server, it will be himself.
The graph is nothing new. I was shown similar statistics when I was an undergrad in the 1970s.
In other news, gravity still works. Sometimes you do have to point out the basics.
Huh, so apparently also a doctor is worth about 3 highschool dropouts. Good to know next time I take hostages… err, yeah.
Someone tried to justify this by saying it’s because women can get pregnant then ask for 3 months maternity leave. So somehow asking for 2% more vacation time (over the course of a 25 year career assuming 2 children) justifies a 25% salary cut.
Maybe it’s just me, but though everyone is complaining that this is old news, rather than dismiss it, we should be even more alarmed by these statistics. The fact that this is still a problem fifty years later shows that we still have work to do, and that instead of just saying it’s old news, strive to change the system so that rather than preaching that we live in an equal society, we may one day actually LIVE it.
I found the chart of the gender gap by profession more enlightening, wish it was in an format to read than a sideways list.
I’ve frequently heard that simply looking at the gender gap by level of education amplifies the problem, because of the gap between professions, and the gender ratios of those professions.
It seems that (in a surprise to no one) the gender gap is more or less across the board. If it makes women feel any better they are at least becoming the clear majority of college enrollment:
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/CrossoverinFemaleMaleCollegeEnrollmentRates.aspx
Yep. Old news..story of my life. If I had a dollar for every time my idea, thought, or solution to a problem was ignored until some male repeated it throughout my “career”, I could go buy my own island.
‘Tis:
A yup. The first time I head the ~25% less pay stat was when I was in high school in the ’90s.
What happened? It’s not like we’ve stopped fighting for pay equality, but there’s been zero progress. What can we do to be heard at this point?
*sigh* I was already bummed out this morning. Now I just want to go back to bed.
Two of the women I went to college with (who I’m still good friends with) went straight back to their old jobs after graduation. It turns out being a hair stylist paid WAY better than any IT related jobs that a woman could get with just an associate’s degree.
A year later, they both had their breasts enhanced with cosmetic surgery. Apparently these paid for themselves in a drastic increase in tips. Both of them have told me, in separate conversations, that they wished they had just gotten the boob jobs first instead of wasting all that money on college.
Well so far the comments here are refreshingly free of MRA arseholes. Which is more than can be said for Sb.
Maybe MRAs are crap at fixing DNS issues.
This study doesn’t take into account so many other factors. The study claims to have accounted for the amount people work, but it does this simply by taking into account whether the worker was full time. That’s not adjusting for the time people work! Pz, as a researcher you know that especially with professional and graduate degrees you’re rarely working 40 hours a week (it’s usually more like 80+ hours).
For example, in my old lab our PI was a man and he would stay there about 20 hours a day. Our post-doc was a woman and she’d leave at 5pm. Our techs were women and they’d leave at 5pm. Do you know how many times I wanted to do some work at 5pm and they absolutely refused, just because they wouldn’t get paid for it? This is pretty typical: I find that most women want to do the bare minimum (40 hours a week), get paid, and do other things in their life. Don’t get me wrong, I think this is a great idea (more Americans should demand money for what they do). But if you want to get paid more, move up in the lab (maybe take it over or get publications out there to run it yourself), this is not the way to go.
It’s ambition that is also the difference here. The man’s goal is typically to move up in the company and make more money. He does this by working late hours and avoiding his family. But a woman is typically charged with the task of raising a family by default. They want to leave early to pick the kids up from the babysitter. They want to make dinner that night. They might be interested in making more money, but they don’t have the means to do so.
And note, I am not saying these things are a result of innate biology or the result of societal norms. I am not saying there aren’t MANY exceptions. I’m saying it’s very difficult for women to move up in a company and have kids, because they’re usually going to end up taking care of those kids. And I’m not saying it has to be this way or it should be this way, but this is the reason every time a study like this comes out it shows the same thing (despite all the progress we have seem to have made in regards to sexism).
Also I realize everything I’ve said is an argument from personal experience. However, if this is really what’s going on I think a study should do more than just make sure these people are working 40 hour weeks. They should take into account every extra hour worked. They should look at the motivation of the people in the study (do they want to raise a family? or is their priority to become president?).
Ultimately it might come back to the idea that society is sexist. But my point is that some seem to suggest that sexism is directly from men unwilling to give women promotions simply because they’re women. I doubt that.
There goes MRA idiot number one!
While the overall information in this chart is infuriating, it is, as has already been pointed out, old news. So the thing that caught my attention was that it’s actually a much closer comparison to say that women with bachelor’s degrees earn about the same amount as men with associates degrees, rather than men with some college/no degree. I realize I’m picking nits here, but it just jumped out at me when looking at this that there was a closer comparison to make than what the authors chose. Which just makes me wonder why they picked the comparison they did.
So that fact someone needs longer to do their job is means they should be paid more ?
When I worked for an employer, if I did not get my work done on time it meant two things. One, I was being given to much to do within my working hours or 2) I was not very efficient.
So you’re saying the reason women don’t get paid as much is that they’re smarter than men and aren’t going to give their valuable time away for free?
I’ve seen similar situations many times, though, and have known men who were just as insistent on regulating their time as the women you describe. Also, the behavior of willingness to work extra hours is correlated more with the likelihood that they will be rewarded for such effort — and again, as we’ve seen a few times on these threads, women’s efforts will be diminished as mere “support” or “less valuable” then the men’s work.
And here we have the “men are harder workers and have different priorities than women” argument.
That’s it, I’m convinced! We get paid less because we’re lazy clock-watchers, unlike the men that we work with who are super duper employees that never request time off or (heaven forbid) leave early or have to deal with family issues or anything at all!
Silly women! Thinking that maybe one day we’ll be equal! I sure am glad Chris showed up to set us straight with his anecdotes!
Making sweeping generalizations with only the support of anecdote and speculation? Just to hang on to the idea that maybe he’s not unfairly privileged over half the population.
I manage to end up both shocked and unsurprised. I heard the 20-25% number back in the 90’s. In the unlikely event that I ever end up making salary decisions for others, I’ll make an extra-special effort to be fair. Equal pay for equal work, better pay for better work.
@Chris Baker
I worked 60 hour weeks, 80 hour weeks, 40 hour weeks, as a construction project manager.
I chose the field because of the pay and because I like engineering.
So even though I have 15 years of experience (and nothing but glowing reviews on my job performance)guess what?
The 25 year old male new hire with his shiny new degree and 0 experience gets paid more than I do. (and he is pretty worthless on the job-site too!) le sob!
They’re not being paid more. They’re moving up in the company. They’re getting raises after someone sees what an ambitious worker they are. In the case of research, they’re writing grants and getting more money that way. They’re also doing research so they can write more grants and get more money later on.
In the professional world it’s often the case that you work excess hours (sometimes without pay). You can’t assume everyone is working 40 hours a week. It is only low paying, entry level positions where 40 hours is a strict rule.
I could also use the example of my own mother. She worked for the post office for 6 years as a clerk and she was offered a position as post master of her post office. This is something she certainly could have done, but she turned it down. (even my own father wanted her to do it) This kind of stuff happens all the time: she was a full time employee that turned down a promotion simply because she knew it would be more work, and more time away from the family.
But that stuff is part of their job. So why do they need longer to do it ? If it is not part of their job then it is not relevant, it it is, then either they are not very good at it, or they are being given to much to do. You cannot have it both ways.
Chris,
You got anything more than anecdotes?
Oh, here’s one for you! My brother-in-law turned down a promotion because the job would have required him to travel and he didn’t want to be away from his 3 year old daughter for long stretches of time.
My point? Your cute little story about your mom is meaningless in this context.
Even if MRA#1 (hereafter known as tweedledee) was right, he is seriously wrong.
One of the large problems tweedledee doesn’t see is that, in addition to conscious/unconscious misogyny, employers thoughts (at least in my otherwise progressive neck of the woods) about a woman goes something like this – “o.k. – she’s having kids/she’ll be having kids soon. Then she would be less likely to work more/slave at unpaid overtime and will request maternety leave/days off/part time.
And with a man in a similar age backet/relationship status etc? Squddily-squat. If anything, employers will think he’ll be more likely to work more when he starts a family.
This of course come from the systemic expectation that mothers should do more domestic work than fathers. In other words there’s a lot about life that tweedledee haven’t sassed…
Mansplainers like Chris, comic relief with their pointless anecdotes.
*applause*
Hey, wait a second. . . My wife and I both have PhDs, but she will soon have an MD as well. How will that fit into the chart? Will her two doctorates make up for my testicles?
BTW, I’m currently a postdoc in a research lab, writing grant applications, doing research in the hopes of publishing, etc. I also have to leave at 5 every day to pick up our daughter, since my wife’s medical school schedule is much less flexible than my lab schedule. How does this fit into Tweedledee’s hypothesis of the lazy woman?
Chris:
You know, I have a hard time believing that women who have the drive and intelligence to earn a PhD aren’t going to have the ambition to do well at work.
I do not believe anyone would be defending this study if it wasn’t about such a sensitive issue (an issue that many/most people already have opinions about). However, this study is NOT taking into account motivation (what is the person’s ultimate career goal? is family or work more important?) or actual hours worked (is this person a strict 9 to 5 or do they work off the clock a lot?). Those are legitimate criticisms regardless of whether it’s applied to sex or race. As it stands, the study provides a very incomplete picture of what is actually going on.
I’ll provide a dumb example. Lets say someone did a study where they looked through a bunch of health records. They divided them by whether they shop mainly at healthfood stores or other grocery stores. In this study I’m sure they’d probably find that the people shopping at healthfood stores are healthier and less obese.
I’m sure most people would rip a study like that apart. These populations have significant differences that aren’t taken into account. It would be an almost meaningless study. Something very similar was done in the Georgetown study. When we get to studies of race or gender like this people tend to ignore whether it was hard science or simply a quick, hypothesis generating cross sectional study. If sex is a factor in pay and promotions, then why hasn’t a more definitive study shown it to be true?
And I’ll fully admit I’ve done zero research on the subject. Perhaps there exists a study that I describe. If it does exist and it shows something similar to the Georgetown study I would say it is accurate and women really are paid less for the same work.
I think its time to go pop some popcorn while Chris gets buried in citations. (psst…not doing your research before making a comment is a good way to make yourself look like an idiot)
Do it by height. Women are paid the same as short men.
Tweedledee – as you clearly haven’t learned to do your homework it’s back to kindergarden for you. No playing with the big boys and girls.
You see, the analogy between people who shop normal food and people who prefer wooish, more expensive food is very broken in many ways (depending on local culture etc you might be very wrong about the outcome too, but that is another matter.)
You see, lifestyle choices is nothing like the difference between XX and XY or phenotypically male and phenotyically female. One is a lifestyle choice, one is a 50/50 chance, with most other variables distributed by chance.
Men and womens experiences, pressures and choices might be different, but it’s still traceable back to their gender – not their other aspects.
Is the study perfect, no, it’s not very usable to formulate a solution. It is though, very usable to define the problem. You can probably see that if you become a bigger boy and learn to do your homework. And try pulling your head out of your arse sometime – it does wonders for your perspective.
They are a bit like short men. Do it by ugly next.
Chris,
Read the comments. Several of us have pointed out that we’ve known of this stat (from various studies) since the 1970s.
Go! Do some research before you make yourself look like an even bigger ass.
Chris, you don’t get it. Every study done that I’ve seen or heard about keeps showing a discrepancy between men’s and women’s renumeration. Simple, sexism may not be as overt as it was, but it still really exists, except in your mind.
Also, I’m a little pissed over the implication of ZOMG, of course men are more ambitious than women, Chris. You might wanna rethink that.
I very curious as to whether a study like I described has been done. If I am wrong I will be just as happy as if I am right. In fact, a study that takes into account motivation and/or hours worked would help me refute other men who make that argument.
I’m actually happy that my wife makes more than me. She’s a hard worker and deserves to make more than my lazy ass. Plus, she has an MS (summa cum laude) and I have an AAS and a BS.
There are two catches, though.
1) I finished my BS as a non-traditional student 4 years after she finished her MS.
2) I work in a male-dominated field, and she works in a female dominated field.
If it weren’t for #1, then #2 would certainly change our situation.
In other words, I’m reasonably certain that if we had both entered our fields at the same time, I’d be making more than her right now. In fact, due to my recent job switch, my pay is not that much less than hers. Her with her MS and 6 years experience, vs me with my BS and 2 years full-time + 2 years part-time experience.
I’ll take MRA-troll talking points for 500…
@Chris Baker (Hereafter referred to as Tweedledee:)
I take your “women work til 5 and men work 20 hours” and raise you… well, me.
I work from around 6.30ish to right about 3.30 every day. If I’m over by an hour or so, I’m annoyed. If I can get out at 3.30 I do not hesitate.
My colleague works until her work is done. She’s regularly here for 9-10 hour days. She always works hard and is always ready to stick around as long as she needs.
So take your “men are harder workers than women” attitude and shove it up your ass!
I am not denying this statistic is true. I have repeatedly said that things are more complicated than “men get paid more than women just because they’re women.” I have little doubt that women really are paid 20% less than men.
In fact, if you’re truly open minded on the subject, you might look at these unchanged statistics over the last 40 years and think “this must be more complex than simply sexism in the workplace.” Have the roles of women changed so little in the last 40 years? Do men really still think of women’s work as less valuable even after 40 years?
I doubt attitudes haven’t changed.
As has been explained, working additional hours is a sign you cannot do your job in the time given. That may or may not be the person fault.
You still have not explained why being over-worked, under-trained or simply bad at your job are grounds for promotion. What rewarding those who work unpaid extra hours does look like is a way of discriminating against women. It is known that women take on a greater share of caring duties, be it for children or adult relatives who have trouble looking after themselves. It therefore follows women are less likely to be able to work additional unpaid hours, and that to reward working those hours discriminates against them. Since there is not evidence that people who work these longer hours are any more committed to their careers, or are any better at their jobs (the reverse is true) then it is a poor metric to use to decide who to promote.
Have you looked at any of the studies showing that job applications done with neutral names get higher approval than those with feminine names, and the ones showing that blind auditions immediately increased the number of women hired for orchestras, and etc. and etc.?
I should see what I can find in terms of how this breaks down across various professions.
I don’t understand how it’s possible, without lots of lawsuits being flung about, to still have this kind of pay inequity with all the legal protections that are supposedly in place to prevent exactly this.
*sigh* we still have a long way to go.
On the plus side, when I was fresh out of College with my BS, my wife was making significantly more than me with her Assoc. =) Oddly, it was mostly because she was in a field that paid generous bonuses for good work. Her salary was lower, but her net income was always higher at the end of the year. (I’m in the aircraft industry , which still doesn’t pay incentive bonuses, unless you are in management.)
And the studies showing that women asking for raises are seen as aggressive and shrill and not good “team players”, whereas men asking for raises are “go-getters” who have a lot of good ambition?
I guess maybe I’ll use this argument when I’m doing my residency. I can’t work 80 hours a week, those additional 40 hours are a sign I couldn’t get my job done! You guys need to give me less work.
Interesting that in the absence of said study to support it, you assert your conclusion as though it were fact, simply because you managed to find an anecdote that supports your belief. I wonder how many contradictory anecdotes you’ve overlooked and/or ignored.
I know that in the UK a number of employers, mainly in the public sector, are not using blind job applications. You send in a job application, or your CV, but the part with your name and identifying details are submitted separately. The personnel department then assigns an identifying number to each application, and sends only the anonymous part to those who are carrying out the initial sifting of applicants. There result is that members of groups that have traditionally been discriminated against do better.
Gee, I wonder if there is a study? Like this one:
Read http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/the-gender-wage-gap-by-occupation-updated-april-2011 and tell us why exactly male nurses earn $200 more than female nurses a month?
(copied from the other site thanks yvi!)
Chris:
So men are more ambitious and harder workers than women. Gotcha.
No, it’s not just a case of sexism in the workplace, it’s a case of a sexist society. Women do more of the parenting and house work and shopping and all of those petty unimportant things* than aren’t valued, often while working at least full time.
But, hey, keep on looking for that study that will confirm that women (and African Americans and Latinos) just aren’t as driven as white men. Simple answer! White men are winners at everything.
*/sarcasm
There is of course a lot of factors. Again, from my neck of the woods, but the factors usually are a mixture of fear of retaliation, conflict-avoidance and the fact that salaries are usually individually determined. That means that while it’s quite easy to see that women are systematically paid a lot less than men, it’s harder to see if woman “a” is paid to little compared to man “b”.
It is well known residents work too many hours. But the medical profession still can’t wrap their mind about it properly, like a frat house with a history of hazing. Long residency hours, which can cause mistakes, are like the hazing. “I did that, they can too”.
Well it is a pity your employers are so barbaric. And so uncaring about patient care as well.
The civilised world is moving to having newly qualified doctors work fewer hours, on the grounds that working 80 hours is not good for someone and not good for patient safety. Tired doctors kill patients.
I think the fact that tweedledee is so quick to defend these numbers by saying in effect “women are lazy” is evidence of an attitude that if it were widespread could probably explain these numbers. Now we just have to ask is tweedledee’s point of view widespread?
And another anecdote for tweedledee. My mom has always worked just as hard as my dad. My mom has a bachelor’s degree and my dad only has some college (in Pakistan). They’ve always made similar amounts of money and my mom has always worked as hard as or harder than my dad.
Toxic machismo at it’s best. ‘scuse me while I visit the big white telephone…
I’m not sure why there is so much confusion about what I’m asking for. This study is taking statistics and throwing them up there. No adjustments for the extra hours these people worked: just blindly saying what they made a week. Extra factors need to be taken into account or the study is just saying what we already know. Nurses can ask for extra hours, extra days to work, they can take promotions to higher paying positions, they can get on-call hours, and they can even get overtime. Where did this study account for those factors?
Oh geez, he’s a skeptic of these studies which simply show the same data over and over again so he must be sexist.
You didn’t read it did you?
I could also use the example of my own mother. She worked for the post office for 6 years as a clerk and she was offered a position as post master of her post office. This is something she certainly could have done, but she turned it down. (even my own father wanted her to do it)
Hey, shitface, as an ex-postal worker, I think you’re full of shit.
I worked in the USPS for nearly 20 years, in over 15 facilities. I never–ever–saw a clerk go from being a clerk one day to Postmaster the next, unless it was for a very, very small post office. In any town larger than a postage stamp, you’d better have moved up the ranks by first being a supervisor first, and then you might–might–get a chance to be a postmaster. Someday.
By the way, you also aren’t “offered” postmaster jobs. The jobs are posted, area-wide, and you apply. You can be encouraged. You can be goaded. But you cannot be “offered” the job without going through an extensive process, and, either your mother didn’t want to be a postmaster, so why the fuck did she apply, or she’s lying, or you’re lying.
I’m going with you lying, since I know you’re a fucking moron.
BTW, the only person I saw walk into a postmaster job? A former executive for Coca Cola’s Beijing operations. Your mother wasn’t a former executive of Coca-Cola’s Beijing operations.
BTW, why don’t you talk to my mother about how she had more experience as an anesthetist than a man who had just gotten out of anesthesia school, he was paid double what she was, and she was expected to work weekends and call and longer hours because he “had a family.” I guess my brothers and I were fucking invisible and didn’t need their only parent at home sometimes. The fucker didn’t even have as many references and didn’t graduate as high in the class as she did.
Fuck you, you fucking moronic douchebag.
Tweedledee, you’re shifting the burden of proof. We say look at this gender discrepancy. You say it’s probably because women are lazy. We say bullshit. You say prove women aren’t lazy because my mom.
I say that the fact you are so able to trot out the “women are lazy” argument shows that systematic discrimination is probably the culprit.
You didn’t read it or you would’t keep asserting such idiotic things. Women do not receive equal pay for equal work. Why should they have to work more to make up for the inequality?
Blame the victim much?
It’s called Google scholar. Use it. Stop declaring that the world must exist in reality just as it does inside your head unless someone forcibly shoves information to the contrary inside it. Look for “orchestra auditions and gender”. Look for “race and gender on job applications”. Look for “gender differences in perception of job performance and raises”. Jesus fucking haploid christ. You know how to type, you know how to be on the internet. Put it to good use, because I for one have better things to do than to serve as your personal tutor.
“Challenging” data from a position of ignorance isn’t being a skeptic Tweedledee… As said, learn to do your homework. There is good data (mine is only from my neck of the woods and in a language you probably don’t understand, but I’m quite sure it’s elsewhere too) – I just can’t be arsed to search up research in English for a dumb fuck who ought to be doing his homework before speaking to adults about serious business.
.
I doubt you have ever bothered to notice sexism in the workplace or anywhere else. (hint: you would actually have to have noticed and thought about other people’s experiences).
.
I doubt you have ever bothered to think critically about how men’s and women’s work is valued.
.
I doubt you have ever noticed the unspoken assumptions that give you certain advantages, in work and out of it, compared to a woman of equal ability and experience; I further doubt that you want to notice them (even if hit over the head with a clue-by-four).
.
You doubt attitudes haven’t changed? All you really have to do is look. Of course it’s trivially true that things aren’t utterly static, but if you think about the difference between superficial and cosmetic lip-service and genuine change of attitude and expectations then no, attitudes really haven’t changed very much if at all.
.
What you doubt and what I doubt don’t matter a damn compared with the evidence: read the damn studies already.
.
Privilege, you haz it. And I doubt that it doesn’t feel great.
.
PS “Privilege” in this context is a specific term drawn originally, afaik, from sociology. It doesn’t mean you get everything you want, and it doesn’t even mean that you deliberately take more than your fair share of advantage; it just means that by the sheer accident of being born male you automatically get certain advantages and/or the benefit of certain doubts as compared with other human beings who happened to get born female. If you want references, do a search on Pharyngula and you’ll find them by the bushel – you just have to do a little reading.
aaargh. Now back to actual work, damnit.
I’ll give a study in support of what I’m saying:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200002103420606
That’s 10% more female physicians than expected going into lower paying, shorter hour academic positions over long hour, high paying (but more volatile) private practice positions.
But I’m sure it has something to do with sexism in the workplace.
Chris,
Those 80 hours are the usual amount of time.
If you can’t get your work done in 80 hours then the freaking GME (and accreditation boards) will be on your ass so fast to determine if you’re either a)ineffective (you don’t pass) or b)given too much to do (your program doesn’t pass).
Furthermore, looking at data, and having a frank discussion of salaries and negotiation with my (male) mentor has lead me to the conclusion that if I make 90% of what he did (adjusted for inflation) with my first contract, I will be happy. Despite the fact that I’ve got more on my CV now that what he did when he was made an associate professor and my chair has commented more than once that if he saw my CV with my current rank left off, he’d beg for me to be an assistant with automatic promotion.
I am good at what I do, and I leave at 5 and I’ll still make less than the men I work with…. but not for long.
Signed,
A female surgery resident, who could eat you for breakfast, but knows that’ll just make her a bitch, so has maintained her Midwestern restraint.
Sigh… Back and forth, from Sb to FTB and back again, to follow both of the dissections… er, discussions of this topic.
PZ,
Finally, the Frog Prince’s golden ball makes sense!
Eliana,
Exactly this!
Chris Baker,
Hey, nice story. Here is one from a group I worked in. The head of our group was a man and worked worked from 10 to 7 at best (laziest scientist I ever met!). Our techs were women and worked overtime several days a week. My fellow PhD students did work 10+ hours regardles of their gender. What does this mean? Nothing, because random anecdotes are without any merit.
This would be a valuable point of critics, IF there would be any data hinting towards women being more lazy than men. Can you provide any?
Otherwise, it makes sense to assume that men and women are equally lazy.
Well, there is a reason to assume, that people, who are more health conscious are indeed more healthy. Therefore, any study design should take this into account.
Yet so far, there is little reason to believe that women are lazier than men.
Again, can you give us any good reason, why this should be the case?
Matt Penfold,
I am not even convinced, that women do work less overtime than men do, even though society gives them most of the burden of caring for their children and elderly relatives.
From my anecdotal experience, they do both working overtime and rearing their children.
I’d really like to see anything, which hints into the direction, that women work less, before consider this to be of any relevance.
I’m not making any claims besides “I don’t think these studies exist.” And as you know, it’s impossible to prove a negative. I thought I was going to be subjected to mounds and mounds of evidence. This evidence should exist. If you guys are so passionate about this issue I’m not sure why it’s so hard to produce a single citation.
There are a million studies out there on this stuff. For example, I found this one after googling what you suggested:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16470499
“The failure to find any differences between men and women in overall job competence, or on communication, empathy and discipline, as perceived by prisoners, suggests that men and women may be performing their jobs similarly in many respects. Women were rated as more professional, and items contributing to this scale related to respecting privacy and keeping calm in difficult situations, where there may be inherent gender biases.”
Ah. Got it. So women are actually seen as more professional in the workplace? And why does this make them less likely to receive a raise or a promotion?
Sheesh. I’m not making the claims here. I’m asking for citations. I outlined a general type of study that I would like to see as evidence and so far everyone has been pretty unable to produce it.
You don’t think it has anything to do with women being expected to do all of that and still run their own households?
Also, they’ve just jumped from one sexist field into another. CHART
Chris,
Your link does not support your assertion. If anything it is showing the direct results of the ingrained sexism.
Big hint Tweedledee: There’s only one person in this thread that has limited the causes to workplace sexism. Guess who?
You need a hint for the hint too? Keywords for that person: Clueless gobshite.
You know, the whole issue of sexism and its effects in society is a lot like the global warming “debate”. One side offers a slew of evidence and effects. The other says “yeah, but it might not be that exactly”. Oh? What might it be, then? “We’re not sure, but you haven’t covered every single base, because what about x and y?” Actually, here are a bunch of other studies that show exactly how x and y are involved. “Oh yeah? But you still haven’t quite accounted for z”. Except that this whole bunch of studies pretty much covers it and leaves no other parsimonious explanation. “Yeah, but it would be too hard to make any changes! We don’t want to!” Maybe, but that still doesn’t change reality…
In my original goddamn post I said that this was often the case.
Holy shit what is wrong with you people? One dissenter and everyone assumes he’s some kind of woman hater. Get off your high horse, take a breath, and think about whether solid evidence really exists that this 20%+ discrepancy is really mostly the result of women getting paid less for the same work. It’s far, far more complex than that.
@ Tethys:
Right? So if we’re *more* professional, than how can we be lazy to account for not making more?
The mind, it boggles.
Please take your anecdote and stick it. Reality does not conform with your prejudices.
Here is evidence:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat22.pdf
Men work more hours than women.
Since this is not the first time you have let your anecdotal experience lead you to make untrue claims, may I suggest you stop using your experience to guide you. Your experience is clearly not typical.
No, but it has something to do with a mansplainer without solid evidence, who think he found some.
And the fact that one side is always men in the one, and people who like to drive cars in the other…
To say it with Bjørk:
Darlig, stop confusing me with your wishful thinking…
@Tweedledee:
There. Is. No. Reason. A. Woman. Should. Be. Paid. Less. Than. A. Man. For. The. Same. Work. Period.
And yet, it’s fairly easy to prove that they do.
You thought that every commenter here would stop discussing anything we’re doing and drop their lives to cater to your offhand desire that you intend to do no work yourself for? Really?
It’s not hard. That’s why we’re telling you to do it. And won’t you trust your own results more than what we give you?
If you won’t educate me how can I learn?
If you cared about these matters you’d be willing to educate me!
I’m just asking questions!
Fuck, but you’re tedious. Stop typing here and start typing in Google. I even gave you some search phrases.
Nah, you don’t hate them. You just think they’re lazy. We get ya.
Matt Penfold,
Thanks for the study. It seems, like men do in fact work more than women.
Well, I can’t rememberer, when I did use anecdotal experience before, but it seems that indeed, my experience is much less typical, than for example Chris Baker’s.
In so far, consider my objections to be moot.
Ironic given his thesis (which we’re supposed to assume is true unless we can disprove it) that men are such hard workers.
Carlie:
I’m surprised too, since a large number of people who have responded to Chris are women– and we all know that our fluffy pink ladybrains are too lazy to do extra work.
One of the things that annoys me about all of this isn’t just the blatant sexism, but the fact that Chris thinks working 80 hours a week is a good thing. No it’s not– it’s your employer taking advantage of you with no regard for your life or your mental health. No one for any reason should feel like they’re forced to put in that kind of time. Sadly, with our minimum wage being so low and job security being as shitty as it is, working obscene hours isn’t going to stop any time soon.
@DrFabulousShoes
Yep, I just love it when I get told that the reason I am paid less is because I am lazy.
The reality is that when I asked point blank why the inept male new hire co-worker gets paid more than me with my STERLING work record the answer was “Well, he has a family to support you know.”
Apparently being a single mother doesn’t count as a family?
fuckers
[hyperbole alert, the following may in no way be view as a justification or gratification of violence]If there was any justice in the world, it would be legal to neuter him with a shotgun after this statement.
Gnumann
That statement was followed by:
“Its not fair, but that’s the way it is and if you don’t like it you don’t have a job anymore as of right now. Choose.”
And before we get into the “You should sue them!” discussion, I might add that the company is owned by two multi-millionaire lawyers who would grind me into dust in the courts.
As a manager, if I see someone routinely putting in 60 or 80 hour weeks I’ll find out why. If they’re overworked I’ll try to get them an assistant or spread their work around. If they’re inefficient I’ll determine the causes of their inefficiency and apply remedies.
Yikes! I hope a new and better employer suddenly materializes for you.
Yup, suing is most likely a bad idea unless you got good evidence and a new job offer on hand. (Might I suggest a small recorder somewhere on your person for your next tête-a-tête with the fucker?)
Tethys,
I cannot come up with anything rational or calm to say about that. I’m just sitting here grinding my teeth.
@Tethys:
Holy crap. I knew people were thinking those things still (my mom got that from her *sister* when I was a kid)…. but saying them? That’s a whole other level of fuckery right there.
I just get told that women shouldn’t be surgeons. Which is really really funny as my direct boss is a…. kick-ass woman surgeon. I’ll be forever in her debt. My hat is off to you.
I think any female in a male dominated industry will have similar stories to share.
Inept male did get fired for incompetence.
My contract ran out and I have excellent references, but there simply aren’t any jobs to be had in construction management unless you do civil construction. (I do commercial and residential)
Yeah, we Pharyngula regulars don’t do anything civil.
My rule of thumb.
If you find a lone female working in a male dominated industry, you can be pretty sure that she is Kick-Ass at her job.
Sigh! My privilege is showing I guess – since my neck of the woods is a socialist hell where people usually have permanent employment.
Ever looked at employment opportunities in Europe? In my neck of the woods people who build things are usually in demand (don’t know of the management stage though, since I’m not very savvy in the building-things-area). If you’re in demand and speak English you’re usually good to go even though you don’t speak the local language. Immigration might be a hassle if the position isn’t well-earing enough though… (I’d be happy to offer a pro-forma marriage if it wasn’t for my general reluctance to break the law and my girlfriend)
Other than that – all sorts of evil socialist hells like 3-5 weeks of paid vacation, good payed sick leave (fully paid one year in my neck of the woods), subsidized childcare, free healthcare, gay marriage and countless other evils.
“break the law and my girlfriend”
Gotta love dangling prepositions.
Coincidentally, just today I was thinking about the reasons why people justify or rationalize paying women less (they lose time due to childcare, they don’t work as hard, etc.) and something occurred to me. In my office where almost everyone is on an annual salary, I frequently hear the following from women and only women (never, ever men):
This is borne out through my observations around the office. It’s because we have to work harder to even approach the same level of recognition. Amazing how pervasive this shit is.
Blues falling down like hail! And they day keeps reminding me – there’s the grammar-police at my tail…
*reads thread*
oh, lovely. “nevermind studies about negative attitudes towards women who ask for promotions; nevermind studies that show the CV’s with female names get picked less often than the same CV with a male/neutral name; there is no sexism in jobs, just because the thing that I claim gets one promoted is the thing women are less likely to be able to do because they are also expected to be primary caretakers of their children and spouses”.
*headdesk*
oh, and also “nevermind studies that show the existence of the glass ceiling for women and the glass elevator for men; clearly, it’s because women are lazy”
So Chris thinks it’s okay that women are paid less for equal work in the monetized workplace, because they’re also expected to do what often amounts to a second full time job for no pay at all?
I’d prefer to think of myself less as grammar police than as a grammar equivalent of an Abbot to your Costello. ;-)
@jadehawk
Do’t forget that it is up to us females to provide the studies showing the evidence. Our silly little brains couldn’t possibly be interpreting our life experience correctly.
Yeah, completely discounting the well documented discrimination against women and speculating that the more likely scenario is that women are lazy. How could we possibly get the idea that you’re a woman hater!?
@Gnumann
I have not considered job-hunting in Europe. I see that they are far ahead of the US in terms of green-building. I would love it if I could just specialize in designing green roofs!!
Construction+Horticulture. Cool!
Yeah ‘Tis, but that is because you are decent human being. Have you handed in your dick yet ? I had to hand mine a couple of weeks ago, over another internet spat about treating women like real people.
Anecdote alert: I work in a female dominated allied health field. In my 10 years of work, have only had 1 female department head. I’ve been asked during 2 separate interviews if I plan on having kids anytime soon. One of my male department heads actually said “I’m not hiring anymore women, you guys just get in here and start having babies and then you’re useless.” :-/ It’s depressing. I can’t speculate on my earning vs. that of anyone else since that information is usually kept very secret and speaking about wages can result in disciplinary action.
Is that actually legal where you live?
Having gone through a couple of job searches recently, I can tell you that that is definitely NOT legal here. We can’t ask anything like that; no questions about spouse or family, nothing that might touch on the bugaboos of race or sex or religion.
Our disdain for you isn’t (mostly) because of your opinion. It’s because you proudly declared your ignorance in your first post by saying you haven’t looked up any research on it and then steadfastly refused to do any work of your own to rectify that problem.
Yes, it is. It’s called sexism.
The other thing you can do is to go over to the linked version of this post at scienceblogs, where Cerberus and others are mopping the floor with data. (This is why I hate this whole dual-posting idea; the good points get diluted across two entirely different places.)
What is it with the crap that stops it being so diluted ?
ephymeris:
Yep, that’s done all the time. Some people ask outright, others try to disguise it as “getting to know you chat”. Back when I used to work for other people, I got that question all the time.
You can’t here in the UK either. Although occasionaly some employer tries it. They always seem to be over 50, male and conservative (small and big C). They always end up loosing at the subsequent tribunal.
None of those things are legal.
However, unless you are working for a large organization that has a HR department, or a public institution, or are independently wealthy and can afford to hire lawyers to sue them, there is no way to fight this except to quit.
You are considered an at-will employee who can be fired for any reason or no reason.
Tethys, I got violence fantasies. Gnumann is right. Emigrate.
Huh? There is no preposition in there. You’ve committed a zeugma, a change of metaphors in midstream.
Thankfully here we are a bit more civilised. Most of the time you cannot claim for unfair dismissal unless you have been in the job for a year. However there are exceptions, and there is no minimum period for cases involving discrimination on the grounds of sex, sexuality, race, age, or religion. Dismissal can also include constructive dismissal, where a person is put in a position such that their continued employment is untenable and resign.
It is also quite easy to take an employer to a tribunal. I know there are plans to make it harder to get help paying for legal advice, but as things stand I believe that cost is not a barrier to seeking legal redress.
One word: union.
My violence fantasies are back.
Seconded!!!
Apparently, crap is like fire and love: if you share it, there’s twice as much of it.
This is why I shouldn’t pay attention to other people’s grammar when I haven’t had enough sleep. And is not a preposition. It’s a conjunction. I stand by my implied point that the sentence is vague, and humorous.
Maybe it’s homeopathic; the more it’s spread around, the more potent it becomes.
Let’s hope PZ has no plans to open any more blogs, otherwise that stuff could become a weapon of mass destruction.
Good lord, I just peeked in the Sb thread and the shit hit the fan pretty damned fast.
PZ! I thought that was just going to be a straight up science blog– a little bit of lighter fair, as it were. How are you juggling two rowdy Pharyngulas?
I’ve been in the position of hiring in IT-related companies. I often hired women because they were cheaper and do just as good a job.
They were cheaper because, in my experience, they generally didn’t negotiate for salary and benefits.
Many times, I’d have the candidates for a position on the short list in for their second interview and get this sort of thing.
Now, it’s possible that I have just always encountered mousy women looking for work in IT. However, I think it’s something more like “less women seem to understand/play the game”. As an employer, it is always to my advantage to get the employee for the minimum I can that satisfies the candidate and gets me someone who can competently get the job done. If women are willing to do the job for less, I’m happy to pay them less.
Because when it comes down to it, if two people are equally qualified, I’ll take the cheaper one. It just happens in IT that there tends to be a lot of work and not that many female candidates. If women’s work is statistically worth less than a man’s, I don’t see why women don’t out-compete men at every opportunity. Men should essentially be unemployable due to price. That’s how I treat it when it comes to hiring: I am buying a service, and the candidates are selling a service. I take the service that best meets my needs at the lowest price I can get it.
In the example above (more-or-less a real-life example), I don’t think the woman got the shaft at all. She’s being paid 20% less because she didn’t want any more. Her inability to grasp at a higher ring is absolutely *NOT* the employer’s problem, nor should I be held responsible for it.
I’ve noticed that unmarried men tend to hang around at work after hours if they have nothing else to do but they aren’t necessarily working. Some married men hang around a lot, too.
Some sets of statistics will show that unmarried women with no kids make about the same as unmarried men ditto — 90% of — so it might be a matter of how much overtime they put in. OTOH, the lower starting salaries — such that you need 4 – 6 years more education to start at the same salary — plus an assumption that women aren’t interested in moving up have a devastating effect on lifetime earnings.
ES – there’s a compounding problem, though; there are studies showing that when women DO act like the man did in that situation that the response of the employer is then “Ew, what a bitch”.
@Evolving Squid: Carlie is right. Women are not encouraged to negotiate salaries. If I tried to do that, the job offer was often withdrawn. Or, I was told the amount was firm, only to find out later they hired the new male fresh from school for the same or more than I (with my years of experience) was getting. We lose, either way.
Thread summary:
PZ: Here’s a study that shows that things are still depressing :(
Everybody: Well, duh! This is discouraging but obvious.
Chris Baker: I don’t know anything but feel qualified to argue against your conclusions anyway! Cower before my anecdotes!
Everybody else: You’re wrong.
Chris Baker: Oh yeah? If I’m so wrong, then why aren’t there any studies? I haven’t seen them in my years and years of not giving a fuck or making any effort whatsoever to find them, so they must not exist!
Everybody else: …Or you just haven’t looked them up. Do your own damn research.
(Exceptionally helpful people: Here are some search terms and instructions to get you started!)
Chris Baker: Why isn’t anybody spoon-feeding me? You must all be WRONG!
Thinking people everywhere: *facepalm*
ES
We understand the game. The game is rigged. I could (and have)asked to be payed the same as a male.
This has never resulted in me being paid the same as a male in the same position. It has resulted in me being labeled a troublemaker/hysterical female/castrating bitch/feminazi.
Which leads to zero possibility of professional advancement within the company.
So tell me some more about how I don’t “play the game” right.
Classical Cipher
You make me laugh a lot. thanks
I got an MS in computer engineering, a pretty secure and well-paying field. The men in those programs out-numbered the women 10 to 1. I would be interested in seeing a breakdown comparing what people studied versus their income levels.
Ask and ye shall receive, Dave –
Georgetown’s survey of the value of different college majors. Computer engineers with terminal bachelor’s degrees had a median earnings of 80k a year if male, 67k a year if female. Please note the small asterisk indicating that this comparison includes only full-time, full-year workers. You’ll find a similar gap among those who majored in other cs, math, and engineering fields.
Of course, that study focuses on degrees earned, not fields currently worked in, so a statistically significant number of women leaving for other types of work after earning degrees in those fields could account for the difference. If that’s the case, however, I’d argue that that’s a sign of a problem in and of itself.
Hi everyone! I intentionally take advantage of people because I’m a fucking miserable excuse for a person!
ES has said that he hires women BECAUSE he can underpay them and then he bitches that women don’t play the game. What an asshole.
Tethys, it seems like we might have had the same boss.
In my last job, a man who started working there the same day as me was promoted above me. We had degrees from the same school, from the same program, but I had two years post-grad experience while he was hired fresh out of school.
When I asked why he was promoted and I wasn’t, I got the “but he has a family to support”. Except in my case his explanation was followed by, “Besides, you’re a single girl. You’d just use the extra money to buy more shoes like those girls in ‘Sex and the City'”.
I shit you not, he actually said that.
Last week, there was a Department of Commerce report on women in STEM fields called “A Gender Gap to Innovation.”
According to the report:
*Women continue to be significantly underrepresented in STEM fields
*Although women in STEM appear to make more than women in non-STEM positions, and the wage gap is not as bad as in other fields, there is still a 14% gender wage gap. There is a gap of around 7-9% within individual fields, but the overall gap is more noticeable because
Actually, Ing, I did not bitch that women don’t play the game. I simply observed that they don’t. You’re claiming that I’m an asshole for being completely and utterly fair in every way. How much more fair can you be than to give someone what they ask?
The world doesn’t owe anyone a particular wage, you have to go out and get the wage you think you deserve. The onus should not be on me to read someone’s mind and give them a higher wage than we could agree upon just because they don’t have a dick.
The only valid comment I’ve seen is that someone rightfully remarked that there are people who would view a woman who plays the game as “bitchy”. Yep, I’ve seen that too. Personally, I’m not like that, but I agree that it happens and it’s a problem. In fact, it’s probably 75% of *the* problem. The remaining 25% is that so many women can’t be arsed to try.
Except if they asked for it you wouldn’t hire them because you want someone you can under pay. You consciously and knowingly exploit people and then blame them because they shouldn’t let them exploit you. And after all why SHOULD any woman bother to ask, they know that an asshole like you is just going to turn them down because there’s 5 other women who known not to ask that they can hire for the cheap rate.
The onus is totally on you to offer the wage people fucking deserve. The fact that you offer less to women because you know they’ll take your scraps is evidence that you’re an exploitative bastard.
How about the 20% of the problem is assholes like you know say “Yes that is a problem” and go ahead and exploit it while claiming that you’re such a nice guy because you don’t actually do it yourself.
Gee. When I see something like “75% of the problem is this“, I would focus on the “this” and try to fix it, rather than exploit it.
But maybe that’s just me.
Evolving Squid – do you think maybe the reason so many women “can’t be arsed to try” is that they know they will be perceived as difficult and this will affect their future with the company?
Hey, look! Data!
Ing says:
I think 20% significantly underestimates the problems inherent in the way people are hired and wages are decided; 100% might be more accurate, although it is also a societal and legal issue. Unfortunately, affirmative action and fair pay frighten the ignorant.
By the way, for those of you who think this can be explained away by anecdotes, in the transgender community, female-to-male workers make slightly more than they did pre-surgery, while male-to-female workers end up making significantly less.
The question isn’t whether or not there is a problem; it’s what we are going to do about it.
Christ in a cream cheese sauce.
I’m applying for a dual Bachelor of IT/Multimedia next year, already have a BA (Hons) and Masters of Arts and Media, and because I’ve never had a job because of my Asperger’s and I’m 30, I’m going to be completely screwed over because I’m female. :(
Starting my own IT business specialising in low income earners and non-profits might just be the go for me…
I’ve never understood the whole “employee tries to set their own salary” part of getting a job. Shouldn’t the employer know how much the jobs they offer are worth? And the employer knows more than the prospective employee exactly how much work they’re planning on requiring, and how extensive the knowledge has to be for it, and how much the employees are costing relative to their profit margin, etc. It’s like… well, if you don’t know how much you ought to be paying the people who work for you, then you’re being a pretty shitty employer because you don’t know much about your company.
Yes, it’s true: decent human beings take it as “dogma” that women are people and should be treated as such.
If you think it’s “edgy” or something to challenge that, keep in mind that you’re basically saying that we’re being close-minded because we refuse to consider the possibility that women really aren’t people.
Chris:
It’s always the defenders of privilege who insist that the only reason they can’t fucking SEE their privilege is because they’re “open minded.”
No, dear, you’re the one with the blinders on.
Oh, joy, another sexist asshole in a white coat. Your future female patients, FSM help ’em, can look forward to you telling them that they don’t have nerves in their cervices, that maybe they shouldn’t get that tubal because hubby won’t like it, and don’t worry their pretty li’l heads.
Fuck’s sake, YOU’RE the one who came in here JAQ’ing off about “Well, maybe women are just lazy.” YOU dig up the fucking stats. We don’t exist to run errands for clueless mansplaining trolls.
I was wondering when you’d get around to tone trolling. Guess what? Just because everybody you’ve met IRL either finds your privileged ass impressive or pretends they do doesn’t mean you’re going to get it here.
Because we’re getting so shrill and hysterical, right? Shove your sexist dogwhistles up your ass.
As for Zimmer’s post, it seems to have drawn out the mansplainers on Tumblr, too:
I don’t “enjoy helping people,” “Mr.” Jimmy, you clueless asshat. If I had to be face to face with people every minute of my day, I’d have to start drinking, because I’m not oriented like that. Which I’m sure in your eyes makes me an unnatural, unfeminine bitch… which means nobody is going to pay me what I’m worth, with my attitude and all. /snarl
My comments seem to have been eaten, unfortunately.
Rather than retype all the… words I had for Chris Baker, I’ll simply observe that the last thing this world needs is another sexist asshole in a white coat who won’t listen to women. Chris’ future female patients, FSM help ’em, are in for lots of assurance that their cervices have no nerves, that maybe they shouldn’t get their tubal because their maayyyunnn might want more babbies, and in general that they shouldn’t worry their pretty li’l heads.
LOL, of course they appear just after I said they were eaten. Murphy’s Law.
I’m a female in an all male industry, but most of my pay is based on sales numbers, so I do well. I do negotiate my base and vacation, and got myself a very nice relocation package, which none of the male employees got, because they didn’t ask. Its true, you have to negotiate, especially in sales; if I don’t, they will think Im incompetent. But there are always outliers in every situation- this is not typical at all. Usually women work harder and make less, just for being women. I use my initials on my resume to get interviews, it’s that bad.
And for the people that say “well a woman is just gonna have babies, and take off, so they are worth less”- heres a anecdote for you. I was pregnant last year, and worked up until week 38 (out of 40). I also had the best year of anyone in the company, and quadrupled my goal, even with 3 months out for maternity leave! Women often work even harder when they know they will be out for maternity, as we don’t want to lose our jobs or be left behind.
I am our families breadwinner, husband stays home with the kid, so I get irritated when I hear the “he has a family” line. What, my family doesn’t count because I have a vulva? Nonsense. Those people are the type that think men should get paid more so they can have a woman at home. Sorry, this is 2011, that no longer is an acceptable attitude.
And Chris, it really IS that simple. It IS Sexism. Really.
Jessa,
Thanks for the study.
Funny that you should mention shoes. I have found that my shoes do have an effect on whether men perceive me as competent, and chose to respect my authority.
Boots baby. High heeled kick-ass boots with a chunky heel. (see Rene Russo in The Thomas Crowne Affair) The sound of my walk, the extra height, the sheer sexiness, all work nicely in my favor.
Part of being a project manager is *gasp* negotiation, and writing contracts. I am always the only women at these contract negotiations, and the same boss was well aware that my presence at that table gave him a competitive edge.
There is another factor here that hasn’t been mentioned in any of the studies. In this company there were only three people above me. All three of them let it be known to me that should I be interested in the position of “Mistress” I would be compensated with a condominium. (ew ew ew ew ew gah!)
And that how I “play the game”. *ebil ebil laugh*
Carlie:
I’ll be entering the job market in about two months. The explanation and advice I’ve gotten about salary negotiations in private sector is that the employer wants to know how ambitious you are and yet how realistically you can assess your own worth. Basically, it’s a gotcha question. I have no work experience and don’t expect much of a salary, but I’m not supposed to set the bar too low (even thought I would work for minimum because it still beats unemployment) because then I’ll seem weak and not ambitious enough.
I’m also looking forward to all the “subtle” versions of “Do you plan to have children soon?” and the shock I’ll probably cause as the only woman on at least a couple of interviews.
Another anecdote: I have three children. I worked a full time, on my feet job, until the doctor made me stop working for my first, worked straight through for my second until I could no longer lift anything (I was working food service at the time) and then went straight back to work within two weeks of a caesarian for my second (before I was officially released to work, causing the scar to tear and widen, but someone had to pay the rent), and went to teaching within a month of my third. I’ve had a job (frequently more like three) since I was 15, and gone to school/college.
I’ve spent exactly three years off since then, because I was homeless.
When at work, I do a ridiculous amount of unrelated bullshit because if you teach, you’re apparently also supposed to be an unpaid counselor for students who can’t get their shit together long enough to turn anything in. You’re also on call 24-7 (I get phone calls from students at midnight on Sundays, at 2 am on Saturdays.) I’m expected to continuously improve and change my lesson plans to catch everyone, because the goal stated by my college is to have a fail rate of 10% (ever tried to teach to students who think reading is boring/annoying? Or who feel entitled to email or call you to be verbally abusive because you’re a teacher and it’s not like you work for a living, or because they don’t like their grade and why should they have to work so hard to learn? Or students who don’t speak English, but were slotted into a regular class even though they aren’t literate or conversational in English because no one wants to put a student in a remedial class so that they can learn the language at a pace which is manageable for them?)
I looked at how many hours a week I tend to work (I’m also in a doctoral program): I work 40 odd hours a week teaching, going to meetings, tutoring, looking at drafts, doing professional development and grading. I work another 30 on my own homework/going to my classes, and the balance of the rest of my time I spend eating, sleeping and doing stuff with my children. I have at least a ten hour day, every day, of work and school. The rest of the time I spend trying to maintain contact with my children, cleaning house, running errands and going on job interviews for other jobs. My friends actually drag me out of the house once a month, in order that I do something which isn’t work. I routinely forget to eat at least one, but often two meals a day because of work.
Somewhere in there, I try to work out.
I am the support of my family, the only support, and right now I’m being paid $1100/month, because I’m only an English professor (and we all know how useless people who teach professional writing are.) Since I’m earning a doctorate, I’m also trying to shape the doctorate to fit market forces, so add another five to ten hours of reading market articles and trying to predict what applications for the doctorate are likely to be hiring at the same time I finish.
But I, like EVERY OTHER PROFESSIONAL WOMAN I KNOW, am lazy and that’s why I’m being paid $6.88/hour to teach college. And, of course, I deliberately chose to be a teacher. It wasn’t one of the few things I can do with a discipline I am good at, and the only thing which was then hiring consistently.
On the “Are you going to have kids question,” I’m looking forward to answering “Actually, my tubes are tied.”
And staring at them.
I keep trying to come up with an answer to the “Are you planning to have kids” question.
Pointing out that it is illegal to ask gets you the “difficult” label.
I think I will say, Well I’m not planning to, are you? Why do you ask?
Hey look, turns out the study did take into account some of the things Chris is asking about. link.
“Ah, but, you might think, women are more likely to take time out of the workforce than men, so perhaps that accounts for the difference. But the gaps calculated here are only for full-time, year-round workers and do not include periods out of the workforce — that is, this is the “best-case scenario” in terms of comparing gender earnings, and yet women still make about 25% less than men at the same educational level. When they include workers taking time out of the workforce, the pay gap would be significantly larger. The far right column in this table shows how much less women make compared to men based on the “typical” work pattern for workers in each educational category:”
Tethys
If for some reason you did want to be difficult, you could answer their question with another question: “Are you hitting on me?” After all, why else should they be interested in your reproductive choices unless they want to be involved?
In case it hasn’t been suggested, post in both places and allow comments at one.
Really? You think 25% of the problem is that women know that trying to negotiate will be counter-productive? You think that if they’re kept ignorant of the fact that trying to ask for a better salary, they’ll be seen as ball-breaking bitches, and passed over for any future promotions, then things will get 25% better?
Guys who say they want change like that usually don’t really mean it, it just sounds nice. They imagine that women could be paid fairly for their labor and the world would keep going essentially the same way it used to, but it wouldn’t. It could not. Economic disadvantage drives a lot of exploitation of women, and a shit ton of men feel they have a “right” to exploiting economically disadvantaged women (pornography, prostitution, wives, etc).
Women get by in the current system by resorting to sex work (housewifery, prostitution, cohabitation, etc). Equal pay seems to be a widely accepted goal within our society but the implications of it would be radical and would cost most men dearly in their power over women as a class. Very few people who want women to get fair pay want women to behave like people who get their fair share (men). Being feminine- as in being obedient and quiet, is not compatible with getting what you deserve in life without being sorry for it. The dudes assigning the salaries to staff would need to cut it out with their prejudices and sexist expectations, and lard knows how hard it is to get a dude to do that. He will say he wants equality, but he won’t want to give up the wealth of porn and sexually submissive women that flows from our economic impoverishment. He won’t want to give up being able to call a woman ugly or a bitch to shut her up. If she gets too uppity as a superior he can tell everyone she fucked her way to the top and erode respect for her based on her sex. All of it is stuff he could never experience or understand, making it that much nicer. It is an extra set of tools for living that make things so much nicer for him. That is all some dudes, especially emasculated ones (like MRAs) have to feel superior about. They won’t give it up in the face of anything except force.
Soooooooooo what you are saying is that people who do charity work- the hard thankless kind that doesn’t pay anything, but betters society, don’t deserve to live. It isn’t easy to live without money, and if they did the maximum good in the world they wouldn’t be able to.
Capitalism doesn’t allow for anything to be “good enough”. Not only that, but it doesn’t make the solution you propose (everyone working for a livable wage which they have earned) possible. The system makes it so a certain amount of people are over-employed (working way more than is really needed or desirable, or doing work that has no value outside of money) and a whole bunch of other people are chronically under employed (social prejudices/lack of opportunities). By definition there cannot be enough opportunity for everyone at once. It is just a shitty system. I wish more people were capable of seeing that instead of trying to make morality look like it fits in with the scheme of a ridiculously inefficient and immoral system. The only moral of capitalism is making money, there is nothing about fairness or earning your way or hard work implied by any part of it. Cheating your way to success makes the same dollars that earning your way does, so it is completely irrelevant within capitalism. People who help trafficking victims don’t make anyone money, according to you they should do some job that doesn’t really need to exist at all (like working at bikinicuts) or shut the fuck up because society doesn’t “owe” them anything. Guess what? Society owes women a lot. We make up the majority of labor that would ruin society if it went undone or paid for. Do you know what happens to kids who don’t have anyone to take care of them? They don’t grow up into upstanding members of society without serious mental or emotional problems, thats for god damn sure.