[malvosenior]

> A good point, but irreconciable with pay gap data

> For people who are tired of rehashing the same old arguments with data and answers that are out there for anyone serious to find...

It's funny that you say that since there is no data supporting the pay gap. In fact there are people posting data in this thread contradicting the pay gap.

If you say data is available to support your argument, you should link to it.

[ergothus]

> It's funny that you say that

I think you misunderstood my point in the "answers that are out there for anyone serious to find" - I'm saying it's worth restating your arguments even if you think people "should" know the "obvious" and "proven". Nothing in that position makes it ironic that I also stated my understanding of things (Be that understanding right or wrong).

> If you say data is available to support your argument, you should link to it.

I've chased this rabbit hole before - assuming you are sincere, I'll point to Wikipedia and let you follow their citations, but there's lots out there:

> In the US the average woman's unadjusted annual salary has been cited as 78% to 82% of that of the average man's. However, after adjusting for choices made by male and female workers in college major, occupation, working hours, and parental leave, multiple studies find that pay rates between males and females varied by 5–6.6% or, females earning 94 cents to every dollar earned by their male counterparts. The remaining 6% of the gap has been speculated to originate from gender discrimination and a difference in ability and/or willingness to negotiate salaries.

I'll be conservative and take the lowest difference and assume that college major, occupation, working hours, and parental leave are 100% by un-pressured choice: 95 cents to the dollar doesn't sound like a lot, until you ask yourself if a 5% raise is significant, particularly since the amount of money in question takes effect every single year. My anecdotal experience suggests the conservative assumptions for that are not reasonable, but YMMV.

[malvosenior]

Even the wikipedia article says there's no citation given to backup the claims (see first paragraph).

> The remaining 6% of the gap has been speculated to originate from gender discrimination and a difference in ability and/or willingness to negotiate salaries.

So according to wikipedia, men may have higher ability or be better negotiators? I don't see a gender pay gap here.

Here's a good article on the subject:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/04/12/dont-buy...

[ergothus]

> Here's a good article on the subject:

How so? The article rants about the 78% claim, without addressing that (a) even correcting for the concerns they state a pay gap exists, and (b) those "choices" men and women make aren't always free choices (witness who takes parental leave in the US vs in more egalitarian countries.

> men may have higher ability or be better negotiators? I don't see a gender pay gap here.

I fail to see how not knowing the source of a gap disproves the gap.

And men having more frequent and successful negotiations is a pretty tested topic itself. When perceived aggression garners one gender respect and another disdain, it's an inevitable result.