From: Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 13:45:01 MDT
From: Samantha Atkins
Dickey, Michael F wrote:
The wage disparity issue is a myth invented by radical man hating
> feminists. The fact is that as women have become a majority in the
"Wow! They obviously cannot begin to overshadow your myth-making
abilities! The wage disparity is a matter of fact, not myth.
Less so today but still not at full parity."
-------------------------
Actually, I didnt write that, Mike Lorrey did. My comments were the ones
that followed, starting at "> In addition, the same flexibilities are often
taken away..." I apologize for not surrounding that quote in quotation
marks. Though my personal opinion would probably jive with Mike Lorrey's,
as A) the feminist agenda has much to gain by promulgating such a myth and
B) that Women will most likely, for a significant time in the future, on
(arithmetic) average earn less than men, for a variety of reasons. 1) that
women are more likely to choose to become stay at home mothers, raise
children, then re-enter the workforce. 2) that women are more likely to
choose to take extended leaves of absence, then re-enter the workforce, thus
having less experience and thus earning less (because they have, overall,
less time in the workforce) and that because of reasons 1 and 2, 3) women
will be more likely to leave their pursuing careers in two income families
when the male moves because they will be less likely to be making more than
the male (because of reasons 1 and 2) and couples will often follow the
greater income earner, sometimes resetting their career or place in the
workforce again, thus perpetuating that imbalance further. Which is why, as
I noted in a previous comment, feminism can not change biology, women are
still the ones that have to give birth. Because of these factors, if you
add up the total number of employed women, and the total number of employed
men, than there is a difference (and there very well should be,
considering), thus the 'wage gap' perpetuated by some feminists. This, of
course, ignores the fact that the more experience you have the more you
earn. If women do not have as many work-hours logged, on average, as men,
then, necessarily, they will on average earn less. Does this mean that the
US is sexist? Not necessarily, this is why we should compare apples to
apples, do women make less then men in comparable positions with comparable
experience? These statistics show the wage gap all but disappearing. While
I think it reasonable some true wage gap exists, I think it also reasonable
that it is continually getting smaller with each passing year, and is
probably currently quite minimal. Certainly not anywhere *near* the 75
cents to every dollar perpetuated by some very vocal feminists.
> workplace, they have consistently eschewed higher pay in exchange for
> more flexibility in hours and scheduling. This is primarily due to their
> choice to have children and be the primary care giver (if not the only
> caregiver) to their children. When this phenomenon is accounted for, one
> sees that in fact women make at least as much as men for similar or same
> positions.
Samantha wrote -
"Most modern women with a career may have one or two children..."
"Most of these professional take only 1-3 months off..."
"most professional parent today resort to full or partial daycare... "
Lots of 'mosts' here, concurring with my above statements. Since 'most'
women do these things, but not 'all' the few who choose to be stay at home
mothers, move with the higher income earning male, or take extended leaves
of absence distort the arithmetic average by factoring into the equation a
comparatively unusually high amount of lower numbers because of fewer
work-hours logged.
>
> ---------------------
>
> In addition, the same flexibilities are often taken away from young single
> male professionals, who are often expected to put in long hours and
> overtime, a bias in this country against single professionals with no
> children, especially men. Re the wage gap "the predominance of men at the
> highest levels of business and government is due, not to "sexism," but to
> women's own desire to rear children, even at some cost to their careers.
> (See Women's Figures and the forthcoming book, The Feminist Dilemma, both
by
> Furchtgott-Roth and Stolba.)" (1) Or, as Tina Fey put it on SNL this
> weekend, Feminism cant change biology (much to the chagrin of
> post-modernists and liberal pc propagandaists that gender is only a social
> construct and not an objective biological one)
>
"What happens to males is irrelevant"
Its disconcerting to learn an intelligent person holds such an opinion.
"and in fact men are often out on sick leave as much or more than women even
with pregnancy
and childbirth thrown in."
That very well may be true, but more women choose to be primary care givers
or take extended leaves of absence than men, thus having less experience in
their fields, thus making less money, thus throwing the curve of the average
down, thus making the argument of a wage gap seem reasonable to the
statistically uninclined or persons seeking confirmation for already
preconceived beliefs.
Regards,
Michael
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:16 MST