|
|
|
|
|
|
by ralusek
2662 days ago
|
|
|
> This unexplained part is often assumed to be (largely) due to discrimination This is literally the part that is controversial, and you're asserting it as a given. Controlling for almost any confounding variable so far has reduced the wage gap, the majority of which was/is often put forward as primarily having been the consequence of discrimination to begin with. There are things that are also simply very difficult to control for, but are certainly at play. Are you sure that productivity is being measured outside of hours worked? Aggressiveness in salary negotiation? Actual hours worked vs. full-time time presumption as all members being 40 hour week? I often see one study attempt to control for one factor and fail on another. Cartoonish discrimination strikes me personally as among the least likely defacto explanations for the remaining gap. |
|
|
The most important IMHO is salary negotiation. Women are less prone to challenge what they're given. That's the reason why a razor for women that is identical but painted a different color is more expensive--women will buy it without challenging the price. Following the same pattern, women are less prone to both negotiate a better salary when hired and ask for a raise.
It's also true that women value people more than objects and work jobs where they take care of people instead of fiddling with objects, which pays less and is less scalable. Finally, less women get satisfaction from "being the best", so while there are a lot of women CEOs and in particular women politicians, most women are not attracted by the prospect of sacrificing everything to get to the top.
There are people that have been taught that there is discrimination, and will see it everywhere. With the pay gap--which would normally be explained by a variety of naturally-occurring things--they just jump to the conclusion that of course it MUST be caused by patriarchy and discrimination. Since it's a very hard thing to measure, you might even be able to find studies that "prove" this theory.
Those women lose however, because if they spent as much time working on the skills that would help them get more money (in particular negotiating skills) as much as they spend complaining about oppression or commiserating themselves, they would make the same if not more than men.
The most powerful people in Europe are women (Merkel, May, etc.). Either there is no powerful oppressive male patriarchy, or we really suck at it. Either way, women get become as successful as they are willing to work for, in western countries.