Oh literal jhohcable.

the wage gap is no myth, it's fairly prevalent around the world and can be most expressed through the fact that there are millions who work for barely $8 an hour, usually because they work in a low education required job, like the in the fast food industry, but as the wages progress to higher numbers there are fewer actually earning those amounts, to the point where there are handfuls of people who make millions every year and have fairly any worries in the world, as opposed to the millions who can't live off the wages they earn and suffer because of the inequality, but even if wages were to be increased, it would only cause a rise in inflation which would only make the higher wage even more useless, as their hard earned dollars would buy less and less due to rising prices.

I believe OP is referring to the gap in average income between men and women, where men usually earn more on average.

Yes this.

And men don't earn more on average anyway. If they could get away with paying women less for "the same job" then companies would obviously only hire women.

The source of the myth comes from the fact that at a coal mine, the men who mine the coal make more money, and then women up in the nice climate controlled offices working as secretaries make less money, and those secretaries are saying that "it's unfair" that the men make more just because they go down into the dangerous coal mine and risk their lives.

And men don't earn more on average anyway. If they could get away with paying women less for "the same job" then companies would obviously only hire women.

That is itself a common misconception of what is meant by the gap, and you're missing what is meant by average. Granted, if a man and women do the same job they'll (generally) be paid the same. But it isn't about paying women less for specific forms of employment, it's that taken as a whole the mix of men being greater represented in high paying forms of employment (CEOs and shit) and women greater represented in lower paying forms of employment (waitresses and shit) amounts to the average income of a women being lower than that of a man.

Tell those dumb bints to go work higher paying jobs then.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siAbiwPyccg

Good one. 8)

oh, well i suppose i miss interpreted then, my bad

Actually, it's not a myth. It's just nowhere near as high as some people claim it is.

When you adjust for things like women's propensity to choose family instead of work (i.e. not taking overtime, passing on promotions, maternity leave etc.) the wage-gap diminishes, yes, but there is still a gap. To say there is absolutely no gap is just not true.

Even after you control for age, career, work hours, work experience, work history, school performance, childcare, etc. -- ALL those things controlled and accounted for at the same time - there is still discrimination. Take for example this study:

Pay Differences among the Highly Paid: The Male-Female Earnings Gap in Lawyers Salaries. R.G. Wood, M.E. Corcoran, and P.N. Courant. 1993. Journal of Labor Economics. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2535080

And from wikipedia, since I'm being lazy:

"Economist June O'Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found an unexplained pay gap of 8% after controlling for experience, education, and number of years on the job. Furthermore, O'Neil found that among young people who have never had a child, women's earnings approach 98 percent of men's.[30]"

"Economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn took a set of human capital variables such as education, labor market experience, and race into account and additionally controlled for occupation, industry, and unionism. While the gender wage gap was considerably smaller when all variables were taken into account, a substantial portion of the pay gap (12%) remained unexplained.[28]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_the_United_States

It's not a myth.

I got enraged too about the other side of the issue. From what I read, it's so inconsistent. Some deny that there isn't even a gap. Some say that there is, but it's because women get pregnant and take time off, so they get paid less. So which is it?

There is a wage gap, and it is because women take time off, therefore they get paid less. I don't think it's fair at all. It just seems odd to me to discriminate pay because of gender. Oh, you're FEMALE? Fuck you, take less pay. BECAUSE OF YOUR GENDER. I thought we as a people had evolved from gender discrimination.

It's definitely a myth, that's been proven a hundred times over.

The only truthful part is that women make more money for working less, with paid maternity leave and such, so if anything men make less than women, that's the only imbalance.

Nope. Even if you adjust for things like job-choice, maternity leave, and such, there is still a wage-gap (albeit a much smaller one).

You say it's been proven hundreds of times, then please debunk the many studies showing otherwise.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=wage+gap+myth

by that logic... http://lmgtfy.com/?q=wage+gap+not+a+myth

Yeah, I'm quite aware of many people like you who repeat the same claim. That's not evidence, it's people claiming things and providing little evidence. Evidence is actual data, and the studies that examine that data (and examine it carefully). Again, like I said, even when you control for pretty much any relevant variable imaginable, you still see a gap:

Pay Differences among the Highly Paid: The Male-Female Earnings Gap in Lawyers Salaries. R.G. Wood, M.E. Corcoran, and P.N. Courant. 1993. Journal of Labor Economics. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2535080

And from wikipedia:

"Economist June O'Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found an unexplained pay gap of 8% after controlling for experience, education, and number of years on the job. Furthermore, O'Neil found that among young people who have never had a child, women's earnings approach 98 percent of men's.[30]"

"Economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn took a set of human capital variables such as education, labor market experience, and race into account and additionally controlled for occupation, industry, and unionism. While the gender wage gap was considerably smaller when all variables were taken into account, a substantial portion of the pay gap (12%) remained unexplained.[28]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_the_United_States

	

	

	

Gender pay gap in the United States:

Male–female income difference, also referred to as the "gender gap in earnings" in the United States, and as the "gender wage gap", the "gender earnings gap", "gender income difference" and the "gender pay gap", refers usually to the ratio of female to male median yearly earnings among full-time, year-round (FTYR) workers.

The statistic is used by government agencies and economists, and is gathered by the United States Census Bureau as part of the Current Population Survey.

In 2010 the median income of FTYR workers was $42,800 for men, compared to $34,700 for women. The female-to-male earnings ratio was 0.81, slightly higher than the 2008 ratio. The female-to-male earnings ratio of 0.81 means that, in 2009, female FTYR workers earned 19% less than male FTYR workers. The statistic does not take into account differences in experience, skill, occupation, education or hours worked, as long as it qualifies as full-time work. However, in 2010, an economist testified to the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee that studies "always find that some portion of the wage gap is unexplained" even after controlling for measurable factors that are assumed to influence earnings. The unexplained portion of the wage gap is attributed by some to gender discrimination.:80

^{Interesting: Male–female income disparity in the United States | Gender pay gap | Glass ceiling | Gender inequality | Equal pay for women}

^{/u/mad-lab can reply with 'delete'. Will delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words | flag a glitch}

1993 nice and recent oh..............

1. That's one of the studies, dummy. I cited others, which are more recent; with one being from 2005.

2. Even if we ignore that and just focus on the one from 93, that doesn't really help your point. It would still be evidence of the gender gap being true in the past and we would have no reason to think it has magically gone away completely in the present.

Please, tell me, what process made the gender gap disappear completely from 1993 to today. Go ahead.

1. That's one of the studies, dummy. I cited others, which are more recent; with one being from 2005.

2. Even if we ignore that and just focus on the one from 93, that doesn't really help your point. It would still be evidence of the gender gap being true in the past and we would have no reason to think it has magically gone away completely in the present.

Please, tell me, what process made the gender gap disappear completely from 1993 to today. Go ahead.