Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

I had potential advisors in graduate school tell me that my career goal to be a principal investigator in a tier 1 institution was flawed because I might have kids someday. And that even if I didn't, I would regret it. Therefore, they were going to pass on admitting me to their labs and choose someone else. Multiple PIs.

Also, women are responsible for 85% of consumer spending because the men in their lives couldn't be bothered to remember to pick up diapers or food for the kids. It isn't rocket science.

First paragraph... That's illegal and, assuming this didn't happen prior to Title IX, why on earth did you not contest it?

Second paragraph... Doesn't change the fact they're spending men's money to buy those things. Despite being a popular excuse, you don't achieve 85% of consumer spending on just "the kids"; it's also hair products, makeup, pedicures, designer clothes, Ikea furniture that DH hates, the latest phone, daily Starbucks, a new car payment, and other non-essentials that add up to far, FAR more than diapers and applesauce. All on the dime of the DH or ex's child support, of course - the unspoken heroes who EARNED one dollar for every one of your 61 cents earned through their unforgiving manual labor jobs and countless overtime, but ultimately forking over half that in taxes, "joint" income, no-fault divorces, and support payments to the women who demand "more, more, more" unearned income in their pockets for the next Ikea furniture run or girls' night out.

Anonymous wrote:I am a lawyer and the gender pay gap in the law is really dramatic because of the penalty in the law for being a woman with kids (there is no penalty for men for having kids). The women who transcend it either (1) do not have children, or (2) have a spouse who is willing to be the primary parent. It's not very common.

Women are making a lot of progress (it's waaaaaaaay better than it was a generation ago, and that was waaaaaaay better than it was a generation before that) but it's still nowhere close to equal. Especially among top earners. I have friends and colleagues who are partners at tippy top firms, and considered the leaders in their practice specialties. The women don't make as much as the men. They work as hard, they are as smart, they are as good with clients, the money doesn't match.

It is especially brutal because of how much it costs to become a lawyer (law school is obscenely expensive) and the ROI for women isn't as good.

I am 20 years into my career and these are painful truths -- I really thought we were further along than this when I entered the field.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

I had potential advisors in graduate school tell me that my career goal to be a principal investigator in a tier 1 institution was flawed because I might have kids someday. And that even if I didn't, I would regret it. Therefore, they were going to pass on admitting me to their labs and choose someone else. Multiple PIs.

Also, women are responsible for 85% of consumer spending because the men in their lives couldn't be bothered to remember to pick up diapers or food for the kids. It isn't rocket science.

First paragraph... That's illegal and, assuming this didn't happen prior to Title IX, why on earth did you not contest it?

Second paragraph... Doesn't change the fact they're spending men's money to buy those things. Despite being a popular excuse, you don't achieve 85% of consumer spending on just "the kids"; it's also hair products, makeup, pedicures, designer clothes, Ikea furniture that DH hates, the latest phone, daily Starbucks, a new car payment, and other non-essentials that add up to far, FAR more than diapers and applesauce. All on the dime of the DH or ex's child support, of course - the unspoken heroes who EARNED one dollar for every one of your 61 cents earned through their unforgiving manual labor jobs and countless overtime, but ultimately forking over half that in taxes, "joint" income, no-fault divorces, and support payments to the women who demand "more, more, more" unearned income in their pockets for the next Ikea furniture run or girls' night out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

I had potential advisors in graduate school tell me that my career goal to be a principal investigator in a tier 1 institution was flawed because I might have kids someday. And that even if I didn't, I would regret it. Therefore, they were going to pass on admitting me to their labs and choose someone else. Multiple PIs.

Also, women are responsible for 85% of consumer spending because the men in their lives couldn't be bothered to remember to pick up diapers or food for the kids. It isn't rocket science.

First paragraph... That's illegal and, assuming this didn't happen prior to Title IX, why on earth did you not contest it?

Second paragraph... Doesn't change the fact they're spending men's money to buy those things. Despite being a popular excuse, you don't achieve 85% of consumer spending on just "the kids"; it's also hair products, makeup, pedicures, designer clothes, Ikea furniture that DH hates, the latest phone, daily Starbucks, a new car payment, and other non-essentials that add up to far, FAR more than diapers and applesauce. All on the dime of the DH or ex's child support, of course - the unspoken heroes who EARNED one dollar for every one of your 61 cents earned through their unforgiving manual labor jobs and countless overtime, but ultimately forking over half that in taxes, "joint" income, no-fault divorces, and support payments to the women who demand "more, more, more" unearned income in their pockets for the next Ikea furniture run or girls' night out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

I had potential advisors in graduate school tell me that my career goal to be a principal investigator in a tier 1 institution was flawed because I might have kids someday. And that even if I didn't, I would regret it. Therefore, they were going to pass on admitting me to their labs and choose someone else. Multiple PIs.

Also, women are responsible for 85% of consumer spending because the men in their lives couldn't be bothered to remember to pick up diapers or food for the kids. It isn't rocket science.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).

But in any case, the motherhood penalty can impact women who aren't mothers-- in some fields women can be passed over for more responsibility or promotion because of a belief that IF they be one moms, they'll check out or quit.

Oh, stop. No hiring manager has ever thought to himself "Oh, this employee might get knocked up one day... I better not hire her.", much less passed that off as a (highly illegal) reason to not hire a woman.

It's all interrelated. You and your friends might all outearn the men in your lives, but most women don't, and women with young children are least likely to outearn men with young children (.62 to the man's dollar).

As long as fathers are flooding hourly positions and working overtime, and woman are in salaried/part-time positions and looking for any excuse to work fewer hours or take unpaid absences, while at the same time receiving tons of financial support from their exes, partners, and government programs (funded by men's tax dollars) for single mothers, it is no wonder that men could possibly be earning more on paper, while women have a greater revenue stream coming in.

How else could women POSSIBLY be responsible for 85% of consumer spending, while only earning 2/3rds of what a man makes? Because they're spending male-earned dollars, be it the DH's, a chunk from an ex's VA disability, or a child support gravy train they've got coming in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's also a trend where jobs dominated by women lose status and pay. Pediatricians are mainly women and they get paid less now than other specialties, for instance.

Ob-gyn too, they are all trained as surgeons but it pays much less than other specialties that include surgery.

Yep, and historically the flip-side is true: computer science during its infancy was thought of as clerical/typist work and was women-dominated. When men began to take an interest, it gained prestige and pay went up. Women were also squeezed out and made to think that they were inferior. The wikipedia page on this is remarkably comprehensive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_computing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women get more education but are more likely to major in unprofitable things and struggle to repay their loans. They are also more likely to drop to part time or take career breaks. So men still make more. The gap is narrowing or may reverse over time.

If it reverses, expect that instead of women whining endlessly about not making enough instead they will whine endlessly about men not pulling their weight.

It’s hard to know exactly how it will shake out other than whining will be in the cards.

Huh, I wonder why the bolded is true? What could it be, what could it be? I wonder if there is some reason that women often seek less-than-full-time positions or end up out of the workforce for extended periods. Some external factor that we aren't thinking of. I just don't know.

My understanding is the pay gap exists even when studies control for absences due to child rearing. I’m 46. I make less than DH but came in to our marriage with a lot more money (inheritance) and started working about a decade before he did (while he earned his PhD). So my 401k is better and if you include dividends from investments I have a higher income than he does.
Among my 4 closest friends, one earns equally to her husband, one left her job as a consultant to be a mother, one is divorced and earned less than her husband at the time of divorce but now earns more than him, and one (vp in finance) drastically out-earns her husband (elementary school teacher).