Is there a gender wage gap? Are women paid less than men to do the same work? Christina Hoff Sommers, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, explains the data.
Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt
Have you taken the pledge for school choice? Click here! http://www.schoolchoicenow.com
Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. http://prageru.com/signup
Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.
Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful.
VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com
PragerU is on Snapchat!
For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX
JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff
If, for the same work, women make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, why don’t businesses hire only women? Wages are the biggest expense for most businesses. So, hiring only women would reduce costs by nearly a quarter – and that would go right to the bottom line. Don’t businesses want to be profitable? Or, are they just really bad at math?
Well, actually, it’s the feminists, celebrities and politicians spreading this wage gap myth who have the math problem.
The 77-cents-on-the-dollar statistic is calculated by dividing the median earnings of all women working full-time by the median earnings of all men working full-time. In other words, if the average income of all men is, say, 40,000 dollars a year, and the average annual income of all women is, say, 30,800 dollars, that would mean that women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. 30,800 divided by 40,000 equals .77.
But these calculations don’t reveal a gender wage injustice because it doesn’t take into account occupation, position, education or hours worked per week.
Even a study by the American Association of University Women, a feminist organization, shows that the actual wage gap shrinks to only 6.6 cents when you factor in different choices men and women make. And the key word here is “choice.” The small wage gap that does exist has nothing to do with paying women less, let alone with sexism; it has to do with differences in individual career choices that men and women make.
In 2009, the U.S. Department of Labor released a paper that examined more than 50 peer-reviewed studies and concluded that the oft-cited 23 percent wage gap “may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” Well, let’s look at some of those choices.
Georgetown University compiled a list of the five best-paying college majors, and the percentage of men or women majoring in those fields:
Number 1 best-paying major: Petroleum Engineering: 87% male
Number 2: Pharmaceutical Sciences: 48% male
3: Mathematics and Computer Science: 67% male
4: Aerospace Engineering: 88% male
5: Chemical Engineering: 72% male
Notice that women out-represent men in only one of the five top-paying majors – by only a few percentage points.
Now consider the same study’s list of the five worst paying college majors:
Number 1: Counseling and Psychology: 74% female
Number 2: Early Childhood Education: 97% female
3: Theology and Religious Vocations: 66% male
4: Human Services and Community Organization: 81% female
5: Social Work: 88% female
Here, it’s the women who lead in all but one category. Even within the same profession, men and women make different career choices that impact how much money they make. Take nursing, where male nurses on the whole earn 18% more than female nurses. The reason? Male nurses gravitate to the best-paying nursing specialties, they work longer hours, and disproportionately find jobs in cities with the highest compensation.
For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/there-no-gender-wage-gap
They do not hire only women for the same reason they pay women less than men. Sexism and prejudice. They think that even with paying less for a female employee it would not be worth it. They do not hire as many women to high positions because they think, among other things, than the underlings will not respect the authority of women, or that women do not do as good of a job.
I don't know why people still disagree with the pay gap when we have clear facts and evidence of it not existing. And shame on those politicians, celebrities, etc. for claiming it does exist so they get public favor.
"Twenty years later, legislation passed by the federal government in 1963 made it illegal to pay men and women different wage rates for equal work on jobs that require equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and are performed under similar working conditions." This is a quote from Google. What I want to know is, even if there is a wage gap, how come these women don't take these businesses to court?
I am a feminist. I agree with everything in this video. WHICH IS WHY, if we want to see women on average earning the same as men on average (referring to the opening statistic she cited) then we need to encourage women to enter certain fields (the top 5 paying majors). What this video did NOT comment on were the REASONS women are choosing not entering these fields. If the TRUE COSTS of a certain career are higher for women than for men, then of course we will see unequal gender representation in said field. By TRUE COSTS I am referring to the emotional costs of being the lone women, or the of facing constant rude comments can take on a person. Society has a long history of gender roles and it has been a very difficult process for people to breakdown these notions of "women's work" versus "a man's work."
For example, if women who want to become petroleum engineers not only have to obtain all the same degrees and experience as their male counterparts, BUT ALSO have to overcome social and emotional obstacles (which men face to a much lesser degree because this field is already seen as a natural fit for men) then OF COURSE women are not choosing to enter those fields because they wage they would earn does not cover all the costs associated with that career. Thus, they way to close the gap between average female and average male earnings is to make adjustments at a societal level on how we work and interact with one another - attempting to make each professional field an equally valid option for both genders.
Lastly, in references to the idea that there is better pay for employees willing to work longer hours or keep more flexible hours. The current trend of women choosing jobs or positions with more traditional working hours can be attributed to the fact that women STILL take on the majority of housework and child rearing responsibilities - so of course they cannot accept positions with irregular or extended hours. Thus, if we want to see women changing the sort of hours they work (and thus the level of pay they receive) then we need to give men paternity leave, and try to equally distribute the burdens or parenthood between the two parents (assuming you are lucky enough to have two parents).
(1) I agree with the entirety of your first point!! Men and Women ARE different and if we refuse to acknowledge those differences then that's not REALLY moving society forward. The goal is to acknowledge and accept those differences, but also accept the similarities that exist between us (studies, which you also refer to, show there is no difference in average IQ of women & men, suggesting similar capacities for intellectual pursuits).
Thus, I also agree that because of those differences there ARE complementarities that exist between certain jobs and each gender such that equality of OUTCOME (seeing 50-50 representation in each field) would NOT be a natural result of equality of opportunity/CHOICE - which I would say is the TRUE goal of any feminist: where women can choose any path in life without fear of rebuke or additional obstacles from society (which, of course, includes the option of becoming homemakers).
(2) I also agree with your second point, that given the capitalistic structure of our society this will be a difficult change to see. BUT, just because it's difficult doesn't mean it's not a worthy goal, and hopefully a goal that we as a society will choose to strive towards.
+Adrien Mouton The article you linked was very interesting. I especially liked a couple of points explaining why women, particularly in more developed countries, do not always pursue STEM: That women have alternatives open to them because of other skills (verbal and/or reading skills) such that "in wealthy nations, they [women] believe that they have the freedom to pursue those alternatives and not worry so much that they pay less," as opposed to women who pursue careers in these fields because this career is the surest way to financial success.
Thus, I do agree that females' lack of stronger presence in STEM is linked to the fact that women, despite being capable of pursuing such careers, choose not to do so -- particularly in societies in which women are treated well since they no longer need financial success as a way to escape poor treatment.
BUT what I think everyone CAN admit to is that our surroundings - TV shows, movies, books, our parents, our role models, etc. - do play a role in shaping our interests. For example, imagine a kid reading illustrated children's books or watching tv shows and repeatedly sees that bakers tend to be women, construction workers tend to be men (and so forth). This child, without really fully realizing, starts assigning gender roles to certain careers, and they start to shy away from certain paths before they have been properly exposed to that option. So OF COURSE we do not see as many women entering certain professions which fall outside of the set of careers that, all their life, they have associated with women - they have never given serious weight to those options!
As for your second point, I think I did not make myself clear because my point has been MISINTERPRETED. I did NOT say that women should choose to ignore their children in favor of working more hours. What I DID try to say is that, because of societal traditions mothers are seen as the default primary care giver of children, and the majority of the childrearing tasks and responsibilities fall to mothers. What I hope society can move towards is the idea that the "default primary care giver" of a child is seen as the parental UNIT, rather than just the mother. (please see the following link for statistical evidence on the disproportionate childrearing responsibilities mothers take on: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0891243205285212)
The father has an equally important a role in the child's life and thus deserves to be seen as equally necessary to the upbringing of their child - which means their employers need to give men the flexibility granted to women when it comes to things such as leaving the office early on some days since its the Dad's turn to pick up the kids from school, or needing the day off to take care of a sick child.
We should be paying attention to why most high paying jobs are done by men. It is not all due to free choice. We are told to do didferent jobs according to our gender. Men and women are told to have different roles to play.
If after factoring in choice the wage-gap shrinks to only 6.6 cents for every dollar, that means that choice isn't responsible for a small wage-gap. The 6.6 cents/ dollar is the result after accounting for choice. This means that women are paid less on average. Some women are likely paid significantly less than male peers working the same jobs while in other companies women are on par with their coworkers. Yes, a large component of the lager wage gap- 77 cents for every dollar is due to job choice, however it does not fully account for the wage gap. And 94 cents to every dollar is still a significant gap.
+ShadowBandit39 Getting paid $6,000 less for every $100,000 isn't significant? While I agree that there isn't a huge gap and that many factors account for this gap, the gap does still exist. Some employers do break the law and get caught discriminating against employees. It may not happen frequently, but it does sometimes happen. I agree with you that paying individuals different wages based on education experience etc. is completely valid. However, this does not necessarily explain the rest of the pay gap.
No not really. And they already explained in the video that are hundreds of other factors that explain that 6.6 cents/dollars. It is already illegal to pay people less for the same job based on gender or race. It is legal to pay them differently based on experience, education, and performance.
There would be more reasons why the top five majors have more men than women. Is it the stereotype of men and women that contributes to this result? We need to put away the stereotypes and encourage women and men to develop themselves in a diversified way. When can we really stop saying "choose a stable job and stay in the family. You don't have to be ambitous,,blablabla"to women and somehow deters them from realizing more possiblities?
Just can't get over that females are wired differently, can you? My sister has B.S. degree and has been offered jobs that make well over 60k. But rather get paid less than 30k to these odd jobs that allow her to travel. Women what a career more for the experience and fulfillment rather those long arduous jobs even if they pay more.
+Karsten Crump In society, people get paid hourly. But sometimes, women want to raise families. They physically cannot work if they want to have a baby, so companies should pay them so they aren't strained financially during what should be some of the happiest times of their lives.
Summary: The title of the video is a lie. There is a 23% wage gap between men and women. But women make different choices than men. When calculating for women's choices, the wage gap is smaller at only 6.6%.
My god people are stupid. The debunk of the myth that there is a wage gap based on gender. There is not. They even stated that 6.6% is explainable through a variety of different factors. Jesus learn to listen.
an interesting problem is leaving the west. E.g. latin america. What about the wage gap here? I saw ads for a job, that stated the monthly income, and it was different for man/woman. Yes! they had 2 salary values. I filled out myself a salary calculator, and finally switched from male to female and rerun it. The result was significant lower.
+Warned Storm In this video, they propose that there is not a gender wage gap; although, they actually admit there is one at the end of the video, even if it's only six cents. However, it's dismissed as being a result of the "choices" of men and women. In another video, "War on Boys", they go on to describe how boys are treated more poorly than girls in school; *this* video explains why this is such a big concern for all of society and why this should be fixed immediately. There is a clear discrepancy here; if women have an inequality, it's a result of choices. If men have one, it's a huge concern. This argument could be twisted into women's favor if they wanted it to be.
This is one example of many of the hypocrisies and stupidities found throughout PragerU. Most of its videos are riddled with factual inconsistencies or logical fallacies. If you look closely enough, this entire channel, aside from a few exceptions, seems to have one core message: if you aren't a Christian, white man who believes in capitalism, you are wrong.
I clicked the dislike button. I am not a "radical feminist". In fact, I'm a man with a basic understanding of undergraduate statistics. Here's why I disliked the video. Ms. Sommers cites an AAUW study and then proceeds to misrepresent its conclusions by making her own unfounded assumption that the 6.6% gap that remains after accounting for "the choices that men and women make"' can be further explained away by "choice". Take a moment to process that. I assume that's what she meant when she said, "The small wage gap that does exist has nothing to do with paying women less, let alone with sexism. It has to do with individual career choices." If what she meant was that "the small wage gap" of 23% can actually be attributed to individual career choices, she's wrong there too! There's still the problematic 6.6% of unexplained gap left, by *her own admission!* Now, let's look at the actual statistics, shall we? You want AAUW data? Here it is: https://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_pdf.php?file=The_Simple_Truth. From pg. 17 in the document: "How do we know that discrimination and bias directly affect women’s pay? Researchers look for the “unexplained” pay gap after statistically accounting for other factors. For instance, after accounting for college major, occupation, economic sector, hours worked, months unemployed since graduation, GPA, type of undergraduate institution, institution selectivity, age, geographical region, and marital status, AAUW found a remaining 7 percent difference between the earnings of male and female college graduates one year after graduation. That gap jumped to 12 percent 10 years after college graduation (AAUW, 2012; AAUW Educational Foundation, 2007). Other researchers have reached similar conclusions about gender discrimination and the pay gap when controlling for certain factors. For instance, a study of medical researchers found an unexplained gap of 6 percent between comparable men and women in the field, and a recent study of the American workforce as a whole found an unexplained gap of 8 percent (Jagsi et al.,2012; Blau & Kahn, 2017)."
This brings about a point that women feel pressured to not presue further education and education in the higher paying jobs. Does this raise a point that there is a problem with how we raise children and what paths they are guided Down
Well here's some facts for you.
https://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_pdf.php?file=The_Simple_Truth. From pg. 17 in the document: "How do we know that discrimination and bias directly affect women’s pay? Researchers look for the “unexplained” pay gap after statistically accounting for other factors. For instance, after accounting for college major, occupation, economic sector, hours worked, months unemployed since graduation, GPA, type of undergraduate institution, institution selectivity, age, geographical region, and marital status, AAUW found a remaining 7 percent difference between the earnings of male and female college graduates one year after graduation. That gap jumped to 12 percent 10 years after college graduation (AAUW, 2012; AAUW Educational Foundation, 2007). Other researchers have reached similar conclusions about gender discrimination and the pay gap when controlling for certain factors. For instance, a study of medical researchers found an unexplained gap of 6 percent between comparable men and women in the field, and a recent study of the American workforce as a whole found an unexplained gap of 8 percent (Jagsi et al.,2012; Blau & Kahn, 2017)."
If you Want a high paying job then go earn it.
I work in bathroom renovations, I earn around 90k/year. My girlfriend is a mining engineer, she made 150k last year. She aimed for a hard job which she achieved, she is a lot smarter than me, so yes she should earn more. Simple.
So, we should ask ourselves why would women opt for lower paying jobs? Researchers found that it’s not women are being pushed into lower paying jobs. Instead, wages go down when women take them. This can be seen in the biology field, where wages dropped as women began to join the field. So much of the debate has descended into a muddle of details: It’s really a motherhood penalty. It’s driven by women working fewer hours. It’s the result of personal choices. It’s because women don’t negotiate. Really, in the end it’s that we don’t value women as much we do as men. Just look at teaching. Arguably THE MOST IMPORTANT job in America was treated with much respect, up until the 1960s when women began to join the workforce. Slowly conditions got worse and worse until it reached the point where funds are so low teachers need to ask parents to send in supplies like tissues and toilet paper. How pathetic is it that our state can’t provide simple necessities like that. I would say it is fair to say that women becoming apart of the workforce plays a role in the devaluing of teachers. Please correct me if you know something I don’t, I actually do enjoy growing a more sophisticated view on matters such as these.
If you're talking about high school or middle school teachers, I think you need to take into account the fact that educational requirements for entering the workforce has increased dramatically since the 60's, making a high school education virtually meaningless except as a prelude for higher education. If you look at the educational institutions that count, namely Universities, the wages that professors make often exceed 100k. According to a 2015 Harvard study, there is a 2:1 hiring preference for University professors, favouring women, across both math-intensive and non-math-intensive fields.
In answer to your question of why women would choose lower paying jobs, I would counter by asking you why it matters? They do, and that's their choice to make. This has nothing to do with valuing women or men, because both women and men are capable of entering any field they want. Why should you be paid more because you pursued something you wanted to do knowing full well it would pay less? Women, moreover, often go into all sorts of care-intensive fields, if you want a reason for why they're so often paid less, where they are working with a finite amount of billable hours, often caring for people who don't have a lot of money anyway, whereas if they pursued professions like, say, engineering, they could develop inventions that have no upper limit to the earnings they produce, because those earnings are not tethered to hourly labour, and you're otherwise being employed by tech industries that have deep, deep pockets due to the scale of the products they sell, the expertise it requires, and the tax bracket of the clients who seek out their services.
It's fairly careless to look at some fields that women have gone into that have maybe started to decline in financial value and point to oppression without actually trying to falsify the claim by isolating other variables. Women dominate psychology, and there is still a huge financial incentive to pursue that career, despite it categorically being a care profession. High school teachers are paid by the government and have pretty minimal educational qualifications. In 2017, only 17% of startups counted one of their founders as being a woman. Not everything is caused by oppression, and if you want to make more money, you have to make sacrifices in other areas, like what you might want to do the most. It's not complicated.
Men will work harder, chat less and are more resistant to stress. That will also make money. But if you give women same money regardless, you simply lose money and eventually lose those male workers who will decide to find job elsewhere.
I've never really believed that women get paid less for the same work. I believe that women have a harder time getting on the top and do more jobs that make less money. This video seems to prove my theory right.
+snipergang Feminine traits like compassion and caring? As if all women have these traits? And men get higher paying jobs because they are all naturally more tough, intelligent, emotionally distant, assertive, etc.? Do you understand a single bit of basic psychology? An iota of biology? That's not how personality traits are developed.
It’s just how society works, noone forces women to work less compensating professions, they choose to do it themselves, because usually those types of professions require feminine traits like compassion, caring etc, whereas men are taught from early childhood to be tough and to be providers so of course they will choose the more paying jobs which usually require more intelligence, toughness, etc. For example most CEO’s are men because the “job” of a CEO requires to be emotionally distant, to be assertive and dominant. All of these are masculine traits.
You don't understand anything.
Who forbids women from choosing less dangerous professions?
Who forbids women from pursuing STEM careers?
Who forbids women from spending more time at work?
Should women be forced to be what they don't want to be?
I'm not saying that Ms Sommers wasn't really good at that narration, but I feel as if they felt it would be better to have a woman talk about the gender wage gap than a man. Some feminist garbage reason about 'mansplaining' or something probably...
+Weregrills I agree, and it is changing. Women have only been active in the workplace since the 50s. It's only been 68 years. Cultural change takes time. The only place where I've seen women not get paid the same as a man for the same job, verbatim, is in higher stature positions that require the individual to say "I work hard, this is what I'm worth, pay or I leave." This is also the same principle. Men are the natural aggressors because it's how we measure our value. Women haven't been in the past because they're not used to measuring their worth so literally.
+Julian Briseno I see. That makes sense. And I agree with you on some levels.
However, I'd argue that even that would be a problem, woman feeling like work shouldn't be a priority is a cultural thing. It gives men more power over their own lives. This means that we should teach women to go for higher paying jobs and press for higher wages.
+Weregrills Not on a grand scale. The individual has nothing to do with the statistic, except that conscious mass shift, like a boycott, has a statistical effect. On average more men than women define success not by their stature within a company, but by their ability to be sole provider for their family regardless if their spouse is employed or not. It's a cultural motivation that's defined our success and failure as men and women that separate us in the workplace. It's unlikely a man will feel like a failure because he didn't make being home his priority. It is unlikely a woman will feel like a failure because she didn't make work her priority.
You know this world? This sad, doomed little world? It needs you. It needs every last Winchester it can get, and I will not let you die. I wont let any of you die. And I wont let you sacrifice yourselves, you mean too much to me! To everything! Yeah, you made a deal. You made a stupid deal, and I broke it. Youre welcome.
Castiel is an angel. He manifests on Earth inside his vessel, Jimmy Novak. He is the only angel that is shown to have been resurrected after having been killed, and he has been resurrected more than once.
Many angels laid siege to Hell to rescue Dean, but it was Castiel who ultimately pulled Dean out. According to Castiel, he did so "Because God commanded it." His hand print was burned into Deans left shoulder. Castiel is amongst a group of angels who manifest on Earth to stop the breaking of the the 66 Seals which will release Lucifer and start the Apocalypse. Over time he develops an empathy for the Winchesters, in particular Dean. When he learns that Michael actually intends for Lucifer to be released so he can kill him, Castiel tries to warn Dean, but is punished. Ultimately he breaks allegiance with Heaven to side with humanity.
With Lucifer free, and Castiel cut off from Heavens power, he decides to try and find the long absent God. When he learns God is not interested in intervening to stop the Apocalypse, he is devastated. He works to support the efforts of Sam, Dean and Bobby in stopping the battle between Michael and Lucifer.
After Sams sacrifice to defeat Lucifer, Castiel tries to rescue him from Lucifers Cage, but fails to retrieve Sams soul. In an attempt to prevent Raphael from restarting the Apocalypse, Castiel is tempted into an alliance with Crowley. The demon offers to help find Purgatory which can provide them both with great power. His efforts mean Castiel becomes increasingly distanced from the Winchesters as he hides his efforts from them, to the extent of breaking Sams mind in order to hinder their pursuit of him.
After taking in the souls of Purgatory, Castiel kills Raphael. He claims that he is no longer an angel, but the new "God." After smiting many people he considered to be doing evil in Gods name, he blacks out and loses control of his vessel, and his powers, to Leviathans possessing him. Conceding to Dean and Sams wishes, Castiel attempts to return all the souls and entities inside him to Purgatory.
After the souls leave Castiel, he apologizes to Dean, and pledges to find some way of redeeming himself. His plans are cut short when the Leviathans, who managed to hold on, take over his vessel. As the vessel rapidly deteriorates, the Leviathans march it into a reservoir, where it disappears beneath the water, releasing them.
Castiel is later found wandering naked in the woods near the water with no memory of who he is by Daphne Allen, who claims that God led her to him. She takes him home, he takes on the name Emmanuel Allen, and they marry. He discovers he has a gift for healing.
While searching for a way to help Sam, whose psychosis is killing him, Dean hears about Emmanuel from another hunter, and is shocked to discover it is Castiel. Castiel eventually regains his memories, and is horrified at what he did. He tries to heal Sam, but unable to do so, he chooses to take Sams madness into his own mind.