The key word in such research is called "Adjusted pay gap" vs "Unadjusted pay gap".
Differences in hours worked, occupations chosen, education, job experience, and location are the big ones. Then there are a few additional ones like age and health.
Depending on which study you either end up with a very minor (~5%) difference between women and men, or none.
With unadjusted pay gap that chooses to limit the selection to fully employed you get a number around 60% in the US. If you don't limit and count all citizen you get a weird number, and if you look at the problem from a social economic status perspective you get an even weirder results.
The proof is in the charge of the accusers. They accuse that there is a wage gap. Can they show a study that is properly peer-reviewed and includes all basic criteria together?
Each time we have this discussion, it derives into « Ok women are not paid less because of their gender, but because they work less. But they’re prevented from working, by social prejudices! »
Which proves my point, and sidesteps the question onto social prejudices. Concerning the question of social prejudices, it’s again a blanket accusation, and each argument has been repealed, but it’s a long discussion.
In each discussion what we can easily prove is that:
- Women work less as soon as they marry a man. When they marry a woman, they earn more. When they are single, they earn more. When they have kids with a lesbian, they work more. The only case they work less is when there’s a husband, and that’s valid even before the first birth!!! All of it points to social expectations that women are not expected to work when they are in couple. Sorry for the « social construct » ideology, but the man is vastly made a slave of the woman in marriage, which would explain all of the above, including the wage-gap-because-they-work-less.
- All in all, girls are treated better at school, better marked for the same copy (measured with anonymization, not just because they’re better), taken careof when they fail and even when « feel unsure » (see the whole debat about « women don’t dare asking for raises »– they got help from everyone on that case - while men don’t even get help when they plan to commit suicide),
- Which results in better, both easier and healthier employment for women, and in average women before children earn 117% of men the same age in USA. I don’t even claim it’s infair that women earn more, I’m just tired of feminists being bigoted about male problems: for every feminist figure there is an inequality m that kills 50x more men and has 100x to 1000x smaller budget (see: beaten women, suicide, workplace deaths, in all of the western world).
Again, the burden of proof falls on those who claim there is an inequality. All we can prove is that every single feminist study was reliably proven false on the topic of wage-gap-for-same-work.
Differences in hours worked, occupations chosen, education, job experience, and location are the big ones. Then there are a few additional ones like age and health.
Depending on which study you either end up with a very minor (~5%) difference between women and men, or none.
With unadjusted pay gap that chooses to limit the selection to fully employed you get a number around 60% in the US. If you don't limit and count all citizen you get a weird number, and if you look at the problem from a social economic status perspective you get an even weirder results.