Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, December 05, 2019

We know men earn more money than women, on average, but a new study just turned up a somewhat surprising manifestation of wage inequality: a gender pay gap in parental leave. Though fathers are less likely than mothers to take time off to care for a new baby or a family member, when they do take leave, they're more likely to be paid by their employer.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

That's because men do all the work.

#1 | Posted by contrecoup at 2019-12-05 05:58 PM | Reply

Yeah, there's no maternity leave, it's banked PTO.

#2 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-12-06 06:45 AM | Reply

What this demonstrates is how shallow the gains are in the equality movement... across the board. When we sit here and say "Well things are better than they used to be" , its a good way to ignore how far we still need to go.

There is no way around these figures. Men's work is still valued more than women's. So the "bitching" fighting clawing, scratching and over all nastiness will contine until have what we want... ALL OF IT.

Something to keep in mind with your rascism too pig brains.

#3 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-12-06 08:37 AM | Reply

My only comment is that other nations treat women far better than does America.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-06 10:51 AM | Reply

--My only comment is that other nations treat women far better than does America.

Women make up 56 percent of college students. Is that the kind of oppression you're talking about?

" In 2015-16, women earned 57% of all bachelor's degrees, 59% of all master's degrees, and 53% of doctorate degrees conferred."

#5 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-06 10:57 AM | Reply

"" In 2015-16, women earned 57% of all bachelor's degrees, 59% of all master's degrees, and 53% of doctorate degrees conferred.""

Key word...."earned."

But did that mean they earned as much money as their male counterparts?

#6 | Posted by danni at 2019-12-06 11:05 AM | Reply

My first thought is this is a self-selection bias. Men whose companies offer paid paternal leave probably are much more likely to actually take that leave. If their company does not offer leave, most probably just keep working.

Because men (usually) have a CHOICE as to whether they should take paternal leave, while women have much less of a choice and generally take, at least some, leave regardless of what their company offers.

#7 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-06 11:16 AM | Reply

Though, I am not trying to defend how our country currently handles paternal leave. Just commenting on the facts presented.

#8 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-12-06 11:18 AM | Reply

But did that mean they earned as much money as their male counterparts?
#6 | POSTED BY DANNI

They didn't pick college degrees that paid...

The more gender equality, the less women in STEM
www.theatlantic.com

It seems like an odd paradox.... but if you are wise it makes sense.

#9 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 11:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#8 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL

I'll explain it to you GTB.

Women choose professions "on average" where they can be easily replaced.

Men on the other hand choose professions which they are wanted to return.

Its not difficult to understand, you just need to remove gender as the variable, and look at the type of jobs those genders tend to have as the variable.

#10 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 11:59 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

"Women choose professions "on average" where they can be easily replaced."

^
This is code for unskilled labor

"Men on the other hand choose professions which they are wanted to return."

^
Code for skilled labor.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 12:06 PM | Reply

#11

Depends upon what you determine as "skilled"

If skilled to you means "cannot be easily replaced", which is a dumb definition, then yes.

Sometimes its not so much the skill, but the knowledge is hard to replace. Or the cost of hiring a new person in time is too great.

Nurses have great skill, but are easily replaced because of immigration. The knowledge is the same everywhere.

Programmers are hard to replace, because the knowledge is specialized. Maybe just maybe you confuse "skilled" with "specialized".

For instance I have poor typing skills, but knowledge that is worth way more than my typing skills, but I essentially get paid to type.

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Lets take the nursing example ..

Lets say you are a Nurse Anesthetist, you have specialized and are worth more than a general nurse ....

Both have skill, one has general knowledge of the field, and more replaceable. The Nurse Anesthetist is more specialized, but again unless the nurse has a special relationship within the context of being a nurse.

The nurse is less valuable (knowledge more general) than a Google engineer with intimate specialized knowledge of Google TenserFlow & CNN that has been there for 10years.

You make the mistake of thinking STEM people are interchangeable parts, this is the biggest mistake of high powered execs, government lackeys and "know it alls" such as yourself.

#13 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 12:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Programmers are hard to replace, because the knowledge is specialized. Maybe just maybe you confuse "skilled" with "specialized".

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris

I worked nearly 36 years in the software industry and when I retired the development staff in the office where I worked was close to 40% female (granted, this was California). And for about 12 of those years, I worked directly for the VP of development, and SHE was a HER.

OCU

#14 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-12-07 12:28 PM | Reply

"The nurse is less valuable (knowledge more general) than a Google engineer with intimate specialized knowledge of Google TenserFlow & CNN that has been there for 10years."

The Google engineer you described is valuable not because they know TensorFlow and ANN. Anybody who can learn computers can learn those things.

They are valuable because they have been part of Google for ten years. It's their organic organizational understanding which sets them apart.

The only way it could have anything to do with gender is if Google puts men into career paths that embed them in the uniqueness of Google, but put women engineers with the same skills in more outward facing positions, where they aren't really learning how the company works and grows internally.

And if Google is doing that, they are discriminating on the basis of gender.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 12:40 PM | Reply

To add to that ....

Also more specialization (in all forms) means more risk ... women in general tend to choose less risky physical occupations, for instance we don't see to many crabbing in the north pacific.

Why wouldn't this also hold true in "skilled" labor, meaning they wouldn't choose occupations that are too specialized because of the risk associated with it. Such as the Google TensorFlow engineer, that engineer could be out of a job next month with some breakthrough technology, and all the specialization is now worthless.

It could just be women in general are more risk averse than men in general.

#16 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 12:43 PM | Reply

#14 | POSTED BY OCUSER

So?

#17 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 12:43 PM | Reply

OCUSER

Do you not understand statistics?

#18 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 12:44 PM | Reply

SO?

#19 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-12-07 12:45 PM | Reply

"Why wouldn't this also hold true in "skilled" labor"

For the same reason Darwinism is real, but Social Darwinism is an elitist and racist (in this case sexist) rationalization for poverty and exploitation.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 12:48 PM | Reply

Such as the Google TensorFlow engineer, that engineer could be out of a job next month with some breakthrough technology, and all the specialization is now worthless.

Nonsense. How long have you been out of tech? There's always breakthrough technologies coming along.

But someone who has been at Google for a decade will be able to see how those new technologies apply to Google.

A decade of organic knowledge can't be bought and it can't be replaced; only re-sown and re-grown in real time. Any ------- can learn TensorFlow relatively quickly. Two completely different things.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 12:53 PM | Reply

So?

#22 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-12-07 12:53 PM | Reply

The Google engineer you described is valuable not because they know TensorFlow and ANN. Anybody who can learn computers can learn those things.

Then again you have no idea, you think they are interchangeable ... but they aren't....

The only way it could have anything to do with gender is if Google puts men into career paths that embed them in the uniqueness of Google, but put women engineers with the same skills in more outward facing positions, where they aren't really learning how the company works and grows internally.

Well first the women need to be engineers .... which as I pointed out the more equality you have the less STEM, WHY?

Also typically the great stride in engineering ie "value" aren't made by being social, or "knowing the business".

Having worked with Google now for 10years, I have only met one woman. But I am not a good metric, as I am on the highly technical side of voice and nlu work.

And if Google is doing that, they are discriminating on the basis of gender.

How would you calculate if Google is more of less bias? Its easy to do .. but you can't just use Google as your dataset.

Can any of you "science" people grok why the more gender equality you have the less STEM graduates?

If you can't, you don't know squat about what you are talking about, because you can't apply it across cultures.

#23 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 01:19 PM | Reply

For the same reason Darwinism is real, but Social Darwinism is an elitist and racist (in this case sexist) rationalization for poverty and exploitation.

This is a cop out.

Are you saying our exploitation of cows isn't elitist? Isn't species bias?

Social Darwinism is just explaining hierarchy and it exists, its exists when you buy groceries, it exists when you shake hands.

It exists as you try to dominate this thread with your ideas and me with mine.

You aren't above it, you behave as a social Darwinist on this thread.

#24 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 01:22 PM | Reply

What I find hilarious about this thread, is the complete lack of scientific approach by people that call other people "science deniers" when it comes to "climate change".

The lack of understanding of basic statistics and research theory confirms my belief Liberals by and large, have not idea how science works, what it is, or how to do it.

If you did you would see what I am saying, has nothing to do with sexism but general application of statistics to explain phenomenon. Instead of using one "preferred" variable in a complicated equation and believing that is the reason.

Here is an image to help you understand the world better, pay it forward.
lifelessonsco.azureedge.net

#25 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-12-07 01:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Are you saying our exploitation of cows isn't elitist? Isn't species bias?"

Huh?
elitist
/'l"d'st,l"d'st/
adjective
relating to or supporting the view that a society or system should be led by an elite.
"older men with an elitist attitude about music"

Nobody thinks farmers are "elite."
Here's what's up:
You've taken the word "elitist" and Social Darwinized it.

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 01:36 PM | Reply

"Social Darwinism is just explaining hierarchy and it exists"

Ahem.

social Darwinism
noun
the theory that individuals, groups, and peoples are subject to the same Darwinian laws of natural selection as plants and animals. Now largely discredited, social Darwinism was advocated by Herbert Spencer and others in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and was used to justify political conservatism, imperialism, and racism and to discourage intervention and reform.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-07 01:38 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort