We’ve seen this crazy video.
I don’t see why we ask serious questions at beauty pageants. I’ve worked with some knockout beautiful scientists, and there are no shortages of ways a woman can show off her brain. And contrary to popular belief, the world sure does take smart AND beautiful women seriously. Tho, to be fair there are so many of these women who have let their brains atrophy while riding their looks that there needs to be an initial winning of trust.
Then again I’ve never exactly seen a butt-ugly dude and IMMEDIATELY assumed he was a genius, so the rules apply to all.
Still Reason hit it out of the PARK with this one.
The bottom line is we can’t compare women and men on even fields because men and women are different. There are still fields of work dominated by women, and fields almost completely men. Also a HUGE factor is stay-at-home Dads are still a rarity.
Once we see a lot more female software engineers, and a lot more stay-at-home Dads we’ll be seeing that gap disappear, because it was NEVER there in the first place.
“…in 40% of American households with children, women are the primary earners, yet they continue to earn less than men…”
I had a female professor in grad school who kept quoting this statistic while she kept telling us how white males were conspiring against society to keep smart educated women and minorities down. If you tried to debunk her, it cost you grade points. These comments had nothing to do with the subject matter of the class. The liberal indoctrination attempts in college are overwhelming.
Anyway, I pointed out to her that the overwhelming cases where a woman is the sole breadwinner of a family with children, the child was a result of a teen pregnancy, and the mother sits at home on benefits. That comment cost me dearly.
Man I’m glad all but my Liberal Arts and Philosophy professors skewed fairly hard to the right of the political spectrum at UMaine.
But then again that’s likely just a product of getting a BS rather than a BA.
Was gonna say, the obvious reason why women are the primary earners in 40% of houses in kids is because most of those 40% of houses with kids are single mothers.
Actually, that’s a good question. What percentage of houses with kids are single/divorced mothers, vs. what percentage are single fathers?
My wife and I were talking about this the other night. A couple of thoughts. The question was such a horribly worded question that I bet anyone would botch it up. This reflects poorly on the judge who made up the question, which reflects poorly on the pageant organization that selected the judge who can’t put together a intelligent question. The question was really three questions in one, the answer to any of which was not necessarily related to the others.
1) 40% of households have a female breadwinner – well, on the one hand I would like to say yeah for feminism, but knowing a few things about statistics, I would say the majority of that 40% don’t have another adult in the household, so it isn’t a contrast of more women working vs more men staying home, it is more single women having babies.
2) Women earn less than men – only if you do a study in absolute dollar terms. Whenever studies have been done that normalize for type of occupation and hours worked, women make as much if not more than men. On the other hand, men tend to work more hours (which translates to more experience and production usually) and work in more dangerous professions (which tend to carry a premium wage), so on an absolute scale it always appears as if men make more.
3) What does this say about society – men and women are different, women are in charge of more households, the marriage rate is declining, feminism hasn’t done anything useful for women in the last 40 years, not enough birth control being used, people still don’t understand statistics, the judges of Miss USA need some remedial English classes… take your pick. The answers to 1 and 2 could be construed to conclude anything about 3.
That being said, I still laughed.
If this pay disparity blather was really true, why would a business ever hire a man when you could save 23% by hiring a woman?
Or why isn’t there lawsuits or HR Whistle Blowers pointing out that women of identical resumes and qualifications are being paid less than similar men. We certainly saw many of such cases with companies that had issues with certain ethnic backgrounds.
Because corporations aren’t greedy, and they don’t care about their bottom line.
Wait… Or have they been telling us the exact opposite?