[hrktb]

I’m not familiar enough with the field, but from what I get scanning payscale.com:

- general physician: 60% women, 137k in average

- pediatricians: 80% women, 144k in average

- obstetricians/gynecologists: 70% women, 205k in average

- radiologist: 20% women, 300k in average

Basically, in the doctors field pediatrician or gynecologist are middle range salary. Nothing to sneeze at, but the more lucrative areas pay way more and are dominated by men. And honestly I don’t think the requirements for radiologist is so much harder than gynecologists, or is it ? (I am no radiologist, that’s just my impression)

[MagnumOpus]

Since there isn't much difference in required skill or credentials or prerequisites (let's assume there isn't) we are back to preferences. What do we observe? The top three are high-social-interaction, nurturing-type jobs, the bottom one is technology-heavy and more solitary.

So we are back at the point that the document made - differing preferences are a far more likely explanation than discrimination.

[hrktb]

I don’t think there is much social interaction difference or technological investment difference between the jobs...but lets assume there is.

Wouldn’t it seem reasonable to you that a young single woman getting out of years of heavy training would want a shot at the 300k job instead of the 200k one ?

Even assuming she is not that interested in radiology, the gap is wide enough she could go the 300k way for a decade or so to amass FU money and just retire or move to a more fun but less paying job afterward (I personally know medical staff going this route and semi-retiring at 35)

I mean, people have preferences, but more than half of the woman in the medical course giving up on 100k of revenure just to have a “nurturing” job seems highly artificial to me. I would highly expect a dozens of other factors pushing them that way, instead of it just being pure personal preference.