As I say, I am convinced the gap is there (as I currently work mostly in management consultancy in HR and payroll I have seen enough figures to assure me it is the case) - some are small, some larger. Like you, I am only really interested in proper 'like for like' comparisons in any case, whether it is about gender or about other factors (for example I did a piece on age & disability related recruitment recently).
I would say that there are many reasons for it and sexism is still one of them - but no longer the overt type (in the main) that drove the need for the 1970 Pay Act although that does still happen. Recruiting or promoting 'in your own image' is an example that impacts on the pay gap because there are still more men than women in higher jobs... even though both sexes might recruit/promote in their own image, the fact that there are more men doing so means the impact is greater. Fortunately there is much better awareness of this now and promoting more standardised recruitment and career development practices are making inroads.
Training women to seek better prospects is essential too, because you are right that they are not, in general, as assertive as men when it comes to 'selling themselves'... although I have seen a significant improvement in this over the past 30 years. The last group I interviewed, even the older women, were just as good as the men at putting their cases forward.
Where I would like to see more improvement is in the relative evaluation of jobs - there is still a throwback to the days of 'women's jobs and men's jobs' where the two are not equally valued (and 'trade' v 'profession' too, that is nothing to do with gender, but with class). Again there has been huge improvement, especially in government who followed a programme of structured job evaluation, but the old 'secretary v plumber; argument that I remember from union work I did in the 80s is still there. I had a row quite recently about the difference between a 'accounts operative' and a 'management reporting officer' because the latter was paid 5k more but, when analysed, was using no different skills or tools to the former... but add the word 'officer' and the job is better paid. Interestingly all the 'operatives' were women and all the 'officers' were men... but I could find no evidence of a deliberate link to the pay disparity and it may have been a coincidence.
So overall I agree the factors are explainable - but I don't think they are all being addressed and certainly not in all areas. Just got to keep plugging away until ability is the only factor that matters.
Interesting. There may be an arguement over which jobs that are favoured largely by one particular sex are valued by society but i suspect it may be based upon economics or the difficulty of the job and ease of filling posts etc. Not dismissing the example you bought up mind you.
What do you think of the mainstream feminists who use pay averages and mislead readers\listeners of the true picture of pay differences between men and women? Do you think anything should be done to oppose their narrative? If womens wages were to overtake mens as a result of compensating for an overblown picture pushed by mainstream feminism should anything be done about it?
A good attempt at getting the discussion back on topic, Seamus, but unfortunately, probably doomed to failure, LOL.
It seems the topic has veered off onto all sorts of sub-plots which have very little to do with male feminism. But I'll talk to you if you're feeling lonely, hahaha..!!
You may be interested to know of the HeForShe campaign which was commenced by the United Nations with the intention of allowing men who wished to do so, to engage with the feminist cause.
A superb speech was made at the UN by Emma Watson, she of Hermione Grainger fame in the Harry Potter movies, to promote this worthy cause.
Come on guys, get with the programme. Show some solidarity.
It did dawn on me somewhat too late that my post was indeed in the 'doomed to failure' category subsequent to posting my inane observation.
Realising there was a furore of head hurting highly animated posts of great length, intensity and hard to comprehend relevance, I decided discretion to be the better part of valour - and fled manfully
Talking of which, I now need to drift wearily to bed, and remember to look in the water before jumping in next time round on such matters :-)
Its not about listing skills as most skills are practical and which can be learned eventually by anyone I imagine....
Men in general are bigger, stronger, sometimes more naturally aggressive and lack the caring, nurturing aspects of a woman's make up. Obviously not every woman as theres some that should never be allowed near children, but I'm talking in general.
Its more to do with the emotional attachment that a mother has with her baby. And I think its different for a man.
Ahh - the Tender Years Doctrine. Even though there have been a lot of examples of abusive mums... but no. She's the best parent because vagina?
I try to keep these diversions out of my own personal interpretation of what I want feminism to achieve.
Feminism, like any social justice cause you care to name, is open to misinterpretation, infiltration and even downright hijacking by those who are determined enough to do so. But just because an individual who calls herself a "feminist" says something that is objectionable to a lot of people shouldn't be allowed to discredit the movement as a whole.
In my opinion, the most important thing for feminists to do, is to keep our eyes on the prize. Equality for women. We mustn't allow factions to develop which intend to use feminism as an umbrella for all sorts of diverse causes.
There are some men out there who will pick up on these divisions and use them as a stick to beat us with.
All I can say is that all I want the feminist cause to fight for is equality for women with men. It's a simple platform, easily explained, easily understood and just, plain RIGHT.
That's all I ask for.
When you have an extremist Feminist LibDem Cabinet Minister (Sarah Noble) calling for actual genocide ("killallmen seriously"), on a work Twitter account - the moral event horizon has been passed.
If Noble became Home Secretary, we could be looking at the nightmare scenario of straight white autistic males like me being forced to their knees, and shot in the back of the head for the summary crime of being born white heterosexual and male. With a round from an SA80.
And I an DEADLY serious. Political Feminism is now a hate movement.
Thankfully, Noble has been suspended by the LibDems.
A good attempt at getting the discussion back on topic, Seamus, but unfortunately, probably doomed to failure, LOL.
It seems the topic has veered off onto all sorts of sub-plots which have very little to do with male feminism. But I'll talk to you if you're feeling lonely, hahaha..!!
You may be interested to know of the HeForShe campaign which was commenced by the United Nations with the intention of allowing men who wished to do so, to engage with the feminist cause.
A superb speech was made at the UN by Emma Watson, she of Hermione Grainger fame in the Harry Potter movies, to promote this worthy cause.
Come on guys, get with the programme. Show some solidarity.
I was sexually abused by girls, silenced by them threatening to cry rape if I talked, and then victim-blamed by my tutor all the time havign Dworkin screaming in my ear through the culture back in 1984 that I was somehow a "rapist" because I had a penis. This still apparently applies... or something.
If I married - then I would only be a visitor in my own home (man now has no legal right to his kids in the UK), due to hardline militant feminists like HArriet Harman and the Fawcett Society.
Somehow I am presumptively assumed to be guilty of rape if I were ever to have sex - as I don't know how I can prove in a court of law that consent existed... if I were ever to have sex I am completely at the mercy of the whim of the woman, as she has this fail-deadly switch of the possibility of a retroactive rape declaration - or something.
Because I am autistic - apparently I am not fully human. or is that because I am male? Or something..
I feel pretty alienated from current most-obvious-to-laypeople feminism - as the loudest most militant flavour would slander me as "rapey" or "misogynistic" somply because of my biology. I am also autistic - so I'm somehow "misogynistic" or "creepy" because of my brain wiring... or something...
Something something something... I am confused something something...
Somehow I am subhuman because autism and penis - and I don't deserve to live.. or somehting.
Cabinet Minister Sarah noble MP called for my death with those "killallmen" tweets...
Why should I join?
30 years ago the fish told the bikes they didn't need them. And they want them back NOW? After callign them "rapist", "misogynist", "obsolete" etc?
This is commenting on the rise and rise of MGTOW- as Political Lesbians such as Andrea Dworkin, and Gender Separatists like Germaine Greer and Sally Miller Gearhart started the damage back int he 80s. Jessica Valenti pushed for men to lose due process and the presumtion of innocence - and for men to be paid less because reasons.
Interesting. There may be an arguement over which jobs that are favoured largely by one particular sex are valued by society but i suspect it may be based upon economics or the difficulty of the job and ease of filling posts etc. Not dismissing the example you bought up mind you.
What do you think of the mainstream feminists who use pay averages and mislead readers\listeners of the true picture of pay differences between men and women? Do you think anything should be done to oppose their narrative? If womens wages were to overtake mens as a result of compensating for an overblown picture pushed by mainstream feminism should anything be done about it?
Well, I don't think decisions on pay or evaluation should be based on anything but sound statistics and logic. If groups (any groups) are not doing that then I would oppose it. I am not sure how women's wages would overtake men's unfairly unless we deliberately pay women more for the same work though... and of course I would oppose that.
As far as I am concerned what matters is that people get paid according to their abilities and the nature of the job. The rates for jobs should be, wherever possible, fairly evaluated to ensure one type of work is not paid differently to another where the skills/benefit to the business etc are similar. They should be recruited based on their skills/experience and promoted on their performance. If we concentrate on achieving those things it will go a long way to addressing the imbalance.
Of course there is still the issue that women (and other groups) may not apply for jobs that attract higher salaries, so it is also important to ensure they are encouraged before they even enter the jobs market to appreciate that it isn't their gender that stops them being a <insert job name here> but an erroneous belief it is a 'man's (or woman's) job'.
If, for any reason, women's pay was artificially raised then that should be immediately addressed - sexism isn't right in either direction.
Well, I don't think decisions on pay or evaluation should be based on anything but sound statistics and logic. If groups (any groups) are not doing that then I would oppose it. I am not sure how women's wages would overtake men's unfairly unless we deliberately pay women more for the same work though... and of course I would oppose that.
As far as I am concerned what matters is that people get paid according to their abilities and the nature of the job. The rates for jobs should be, wherever possible, fairly evaluated to ensure one type of work is not paid differently to another where the skills/benefit to the business etc are similar. They should be recruited based on their skills/experience and promoted on their performance. If we concentrate on achieving those things it will go a long way to addressing the imbalance.
Of course there is still the issue that women (and other groups) may not apply for jobs that attract higher salaries, so it is also important to ensure they are encouraged before they even enter the jobs market to appreciate that it isn't their gender that stops them being a <insert job name here> but an erroneous belief it is a 'man's (or woman's) job'.
If, for any reason, women's pay was artificially raised then that should be immediately addressed - sexism isn't right in either direction.
Ahhh - cool.
Same camp as Christina Hoff-Sommers then!
You might want to monitor #gamergate, #notyourshield and @chsommers over on Twitter to see the fun.
AntiGG narrative is being ripped apart...
I have PLENTY of time for CHS and Warren Farrell - not so much for the Steinem camp..
They are not using me as a 'meatshield' at all. They don't speak for me and I don't speak for them. I consider myself a liberal, but I don't agree with all liberals. I am a person of faith, but I don't agree with everything every other believer's say. etc.
People use labels - I have used that one for 40 years because I believe in supporting equality for women... and just because there are extremists who also use the word does not mean I support them or agree with them.
As for the actual comment you linked to - I didn't think it was called 'forced sex' - as far as I am aware it is called sexual assault and in the UK it rightly carries the same penalty as rape. I have said in the past that I have no issue with removing the word 'rape' from the statute books because it is an archaic term and doesn't cover assaults by women on men... or on other women for that matter. Rape is all about sticking a penis where it isn't wanted and, frankly having experienced both this and a similar act carried out by a woman, there is no difference between the crimes at all from the victim's perspective.
They are not using me as a 'meatshield' at all. They don't speak for me and I don't speak for them. I consider myself a liberal, but I don't agree with all liberals. I am a person of faith, but I don't agree with everything every other believer's say. etc.
People use labels - I have used that one for 40 years because I believe in supporting equality for women... and just because there are extremists who also use the word does not mean I support them or agree with them.
As for the actual comment you linked to - I didn't think it was called 'forced sex' - as far as I am aware it is called sexual assault and in the UK it rightly carries the same penalty as rape. I have said in the past that I have no issue with removing the word 'rape' from the statute books because it is an archaic term and doesn't cover assaults by women on men... or on other women for that matter. Rape is all about sticking a penis where it isn't wanted and, frankly having experienced both this and a similar act carried out by a woman, there is no difference between the crimes at all from the victim's perspective.
Yes - but it was Mary Koss who redefined female-on-male rape as "made to penetrate"....
direct report to Gloria Steinem. Also started DUluth...
But cool . Thanks..
Rather than just calling them out within the Feminist ivory tower - that callout and shutdown needs to be done on Newsnight...
Well, I don't think decisions on pay or evaluation should be based on anything but sound statistics and logic. If groups (any groups) are not doing that then I would oppose it. I am not sure how women's wages would overtake men's unfairly unless we deliberately pay women more for the same work though... and of course I would oppose that.
As far as I am concerned what matters is that people get paid according to their abilities and the nature of the job. The rates for jobs should be, wherever possible, fairly evaluated to ensure one type of work is not paid differently to another where the skills/benefit to the business etc are similar. They should be recruited based on their skills/experience and promoted on their performance. If we concentrate on achieving those things it will go a long way to addressing the imbalance.
Of course there is still the issue that women (and other groups) may not apply for jobs that attract higher salaries, so it is also important to ensure they are encouraged before they even enter the jobs market to appreciate that it isn't their gender that stops them being a <insert job name here> but an erroneous belief it is a 'man's (or woman's) job'.
If, for any reason, women's pay was artificially raised then that should be immediately addressed - sexism isn't right in either direction.
Comments
Interesting. There may be an arguement over which jobs that are favoured largely by one particular sex are valued by society but i suspect it may be based upon economics or the difficulty of the job and ease of filling posts etc. Not dismissing the example you bought up mind you.
What do you think of the mainstream feminists who use pay averages and mislead readers\listeners of the true picture of pay differences between men and women? Do you think anything should be done to oppose their narrative? If womens wages were to overtake mens as a result of compensating for an overblown picture pushed by mainstream feminism should anything be done about it?
It did dawn on me somewhat too late that my post was indeed in the 'doomed to failure' category subsequent to posting my inane observation.
Realising there was a furore of head hurting highly animated posts of great length, intensity and hard to comprehend relevance, I decided discretion to be the better part of valour - and fled manfully
Talking of which, I now need to drift wearily to bed, and remember to look in the water before jumping in next time round on such matters :-)
If Noble became Home Secretary, we could be looking at the nightmare scenario of straight white autistic males like me being forced to their knees, and shot in the back of the head for the summary crime of being born white heterosexual and male. With a round from an SA80.
And I an DEADLY serious. Political Feminism is now a hate movement.
Thankfully, Noble has been suspended by the LibDems.
http://honeybadgerbrigade.com/2014/12/07/feminist-end-game-the-final-solution/
!Equality for women"... at what cost to men? Are men human?
Holding up hatred of men as something to emulate.
I was sexually abused by girls, silenced by them threatening to cry rape if I talked, and then victim-blamed by my tutor all the time havign Dworkin screaming in my ear through the culture back in 1984 that I was somehow a "rapist" because I had a penis. This still apparently applies... or something.
If I married - then I would only be a visitor in my own home (man now has no legal right to his kids in the UK), due to hardline militant feminists like HArriet Harman and the Fawcett Society.
Somehow I am presumptively assumed to be guilty of rape if I were ever to have sex - as I don't know how I can prove in a court of law that consent existed... if I were ever to have sex I am completely at the mercy of the whim of the woman, as she has this fail-deadly switch of the possibility of a retroactive rape declaration - or something.
Because I am autistic - apparently I am not fully human. or is that because I am male? Or something..
I feel pretty alienated from current most-obvious-to-laypeople feminism - as the loudest most militant flavour would slander me as "rapey" or "misogynistic" somply because of my biology. I am also autistic - so I'm somehow "misogynistic" or "creepy" because of my brain wiring... or something...
Something something something... I am confused something something...
Somehow I am subhuman because autism and penis - and I don't deserve to live.. or somehting.
Cabinet Minister Sarah noble MP called for my death with those "killallmen" tweets...
Why should I join?
30 years ago the fish told the bikes they didn't need them. And they want them back NOW? After callign them "rapist", "misogynist", "obsolete" etc?
He for She? "Women before children - men come last"? Plowhorses for Princesses? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAeSTsDc4qE
No.
Hermione, go **** yourself.
An interesting comment from Belinda Brown - another columnist.
http://conservativewoman.co.uk/belinda-brown-a-century-of-feminism-has-failed-us-women-have-betrayed-mens-trust/
This is commenting on the rise and rise of MGTOW- as Political Lesbians such as Andrea Dworkin, and Gender Separatists like Germaine Greer and Sally Miller Gearhart started the damage back int he 80s. Jessica Valenti pushed for men to lose due process and the presumtion of innocence - and for men to be paid less because reasons.
This is a summary of MGTOW - Men Going Their Own Way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOIduTY0mHY
IF the extremists are called out loudly and in public in front of news cameras - THEN there might be scope to talk.
A lot of ex-feminists are in the MRM...
A LOT of feminism-in-power is VERY confusing to the layman...
Their version of feminism, not mine.
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/34tja3/why_is_it_called_forced_sex_when_women_do_it_but/
Classic Motte and Bailey.
However, to be fair- there ARE two major camps.
May I ask whether you see your feminism as downstream of Gloria Steinem and Jessica Valenti (feminism in power)?
Or closer to Christina Hoff-Sommers, Cathy Young, Wendy McElroy etc (feminism in exile)?
Well, I don't think decisions on pay or evaluation should be based on anything but sound statistics and logic. If groups (any groups) are not doing that then I would oppose it. I am not sure how women's wages would overtake men's unfairly unless we deliberately pay women more for the same work though... and of course I would oppose that.
As far as I am concerned what matters is that people get paid according to their abilities and the nature of the job. The rates for jobs should be, wherever possible, fairly evaluated to ensure one type of work is not paid differently to another where the skills/benefit to the business etc are similar. They should be recruited based on their skills/experience and promoted on their performance. If we concentrate on achieving those things it will go a long way to addressing the imbalance.
Of course there is still the issue that women (and other groups) may not apply for jobs that attract higher salaries, so it is also important to ensure they are encouraged before they even enter the jobs market to appreciate that it isn't their gender that stops them being a <insert job name here> but an erroneous belief it is a 'man's (or woman's) job'.
If, for any reason, women's pay was artificially raised then that should be immediately addressed - sexism isn't right in either direction.
Same camp as Christina Hoff-Sommers then!
You might want to monitor #gamergate, #notyourshield and @chsommers over on Twitter to see the fun.
AntiGG narrative is being ripped apart...
I have PLENTY of time for CHS and Warren Farrell - not so much for the Steinem camp..
They are not using me as a 'meatshield' at all. They don't speak for me and I don't speak for them. I consider myself a liberal, but I don't agree with all liberals. I am a person of faith, but I don't agree with everything every other believer's say. etc.
People use labels - I have used that one for 40 years because I believe in supporting equality for women... and just because there are extremists who also use the word does not mean I support them or agree with them.
As for the actual comment you linked to - I didn't think it was called 'forced sex' - as far as I am aware it is called sexual assault and in the UK it rightly carries the same penalty as rape. I have said in the past that I have no issue with removing the word 'rape' from the statute books because it is an archaic term and doesn't cover assaults by women on men... or on other women for that matter. Rape is all about sticking a penis where it isn't wanted and, frankly having experienced both this and a similar act carried out by a woman, there is no difference between the crimes at all from the victim's perspective.
I will take a look when I go on Twitter later... I have not really been following gamergate.
direct report to Gloria Steinem. Also started DUluth...
But cool . Thanks..
Rather than just calling them out within the Feminist ivory tower - that callout and shutdown needs to be done on Newsnight...
Thanks for your answers