TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Pay gap explanation by Vox

James32015

August 2, 2016
21 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/12108126/gender-wage-gap-explained-real
Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Pay gap explanation by Vox
Author

James32015

Upvotes 21
Comments 59
Date August 2, 2016 6:04 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4vtui4/pay_gap_explanation_by_vox/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/pay-gap-explanation-by-vox.944476
https://theredarchive.com/post/944476
Top posts by James32015

This article on Cosmo about a period sex cup makes me irrationally angry

6 upvotes
February 6, 2017
/r/MensRights

Dear Everybody: Let's Talk About White Male Privilege

0 upvotes
December 17, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

"The gender gap in pay would be considerably reduced and might even vanish if firms did not have an incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who worked long hours and worked particular hours."

[–]James32015[S] 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Lol that's the best part. Why do people who work more and work the hours their employer prefers paid more? Truly a mystery for the ages.

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Its SO UNFAIR! I mean, just because Joe works 3 times more hours than I do doesn't mean he should get paid more! Thats sexist! The firms fail to recognize the intangible and emotional intelligence resources that women bring to the table that cannot be quantified.

And, so what that Joe will reliably be there at 6:30 everynight. Just because I have a social life doesn't mean I should be penalized.

---they literally think like this

[–]James32015[S] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The worst bit are the studies showing that longer hours don't necessarily mean more efficiency. What they don't realize is not everything is about efficiency. Rewarding loyal and hardworking employees is just good business practice. Companies aren't run like the Borg.

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In law, your pay is tied directly to your ability to generate fees. When you are young, unless you are really connected, the only way to generate more fees is to bill more hours. Hence, if you chose to work fewer hours, you will generate fewer fees, and, in turn, be paid less.

[–]James32015[S] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But it's totally unfair!

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

longer hours don't necessarily mean more efficiency.

No shit. But clients are still willing to pay me for my 11th hour of the day at the same rate as my first and would much rather pay for me than for me to bring on someone else to help.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]James32015[S] 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But if B is at the office when I need him to be...of course he's going to be more valued.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]wilwarland 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The thing that makes key hours important is the fact that they cannot be moved. This is when the work HAS to be done, and it cannot be done at any other time.

If they could be moved arbitrarily, then they wouldn't be key working hours.

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

are not at the office at key moments.......Goldin's argument is that, A is not necessarily a bad worker and that companies should try to reduce the influence working long hours has to career progression.

But "good" or "bad" merely addresses "competence"--not ability to produce results WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED.

The associate who can give me a motion when I ask for it at noon on Saturday is much more valuable to me then one who turns it in on Monday morning.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No. I need it at noon on Saturday so I can review it Saturday afternoon, and send a draft to the client before it is finalized and filed on Monday.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't understand how the legal profession works. You work 60+ hours a week. Saturdays are usually mandatory. Last minute assignments are not uncommon at all. An unexpected issue comes up at trial; there is a new wrinkle in a closing, etc. or, the client calls on 5 pm friday and demands a contract by monday morning---all VERY typical things.

A "good associate" is one who drops everything and says how high when the boss says jump.

[–]Pornography_saves_li 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You would be fired from almost every job I ever held for that attitude.

[–]Swiggy 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Goldin's argument is that, A is not necessarily a bad worker and that companies should try to reduce the influence working long hours has to career progression.

A is not a bad worker, and doesn't get a bad salary. People who work longer and harder generally get promoted, this is not a gender issue that needs to be fixed. If A and B were both men nobody would be bothered by the way this works.

[–]franklindeer 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I sort of agree just because we should all work less, not more as we move into the future and the opposite is happening. But her actual argument is mostly nonsense. So much of career success is just being around at the right time, if you're not making sure you're keeping your eye out or around for those opportunities you miss them. If you're a contractor, answering a phone call at the right time could make a massive difference in earnings that year, how can you alter that? You can't so far as I can tell without moving to a planned economy and we all know how well those function.

[–]Swiggy 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Closing the wage gap means making jobs work differently.

If the wage gap is caused by men working more hours then it is not a problem that needs to be "closed".

[+]joetheschmoe4000 10 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to have to disagree. The author makes the argument that this hours-worked gap stems from women taking time off for their children in their 20s and 30s. This is not necessarily discriminatory, but largely societal.

However, one policy that could decrease the hours-worked gap would be paid maternal and paternal leave, allowing fathers and mothers to be on equal (legal) footing with regard to taking time off to care for their kids. I think that's something many people could get behind.

[–]iainmf 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The downstream upstream problem is that most women choose partners that earn more than them. It makes sense that the person who earns the least take the time off work, and typically this is the woman.

[–]Swiggy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is not necessarily discriminatory, but largely societal.

I think by and large this is a choice that women want to make. I have seen similar efforts to close the pay and achievement gaps and there is usually push back when women are given the choice to give up their social and family life to dedicate to work.

However, one policy that could decrease the hours-worked gap would be paid maternal and paternal leave, allowing fathers and mothers to be on equal (legal) footing with regard to taking time off to care for their kids. I think that's something many people could get behind.

If the husband and wife both contribute financially to the family, why does it matter who is the one that is earning more?

[–]joetheschmoe4000 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Because this is an issue of individual rights, not collective rights of a family unit. Giving both parents parental leave will equalize much of the legal inequality of hours-worked while still leaving it up to individuals whether they choose to use that freedom.

[–]franklindeer 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am all for paternity leave, but you're not going to change the fact that taking time off will decrease longterm earnings somewhat. If you did correct for that you'd now be penalizing employees who choose not to have children by paying them less per hour worked and less per year of experience. There is no fair way to make leaving work to parent have 0 impact on earnings.

[–]Swiggy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can have paternal leave but since it really doesn't make a difference in who is bringing home less I still think women will choose to stay home just as much as they do now.

[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a choice. Not one I fault, but nonetheless a choice. I personally am in a career where I will never have children as a result. I was never enthralled with the idea of having them but either way I have made the decision and I have to live with it. If I made a different choice it would come with a huge pay cut and lifestyle change and that would also be a choice. It's not a punishment, it's just basic economics. If you can't work or gain experience, you're not worth as much.

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can institute all the "policies" you want. Men will still be discriminated against for taking family leave.

[+]-_-I-_-I-_- 10 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

the best way to tackle the wage gap is by implementing policies that make all hours equally valuable

I've never seen a more dystopian, dangerous, and downright frightening statement.

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

the best way to tackle the wage gap is by implementing policies that make all hours equally valuable

But all hours are not "equally valuable", particularly in a client-service industry.

No, its not good enough that you get me the report at 7:00 pm, after you have attended to your children, I need it at 5:00pm to send to the client. Client wants it at 5, he gets it at 5. If you have more important things to do, thats your problem, not mine. Produce or get the fuck out.

[–]-_-I-_-I-_-2 points 10 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly -- only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs! "

  • Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875, by Karl Marx, from Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels Selected Works

A terrifying read if you have the time...

This is what they mean by such ludicrous statements. This is what is being taught in most colleges and universities. This is the way they are propagandizing, indoctrinating, and conditioning... towards a global society controlled by an oligarchical elite few using an iron fist covered - at first - with a velvet glove, where drive, ambition, creativity, ingenuity, merit, hard work ethic, and dedication to anything but Party and State is meaningless, frowned upon, and eventually severely disciplined as the velvet glove is forever removed.

[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I work in an industry where this is truer than for most. I deal with clients in other time zones and regularly have tight deadlines for delivery. If I were regularly unavailable during hours that were convenient for clients then it would definitely have a negative impact on my earnings. Granted I am not staying up all night to have discussions or anything, but I do have to answer phone calls and emails outside of work hours and if a project has to be delivered in a short timeline then that's just how it is.

[–]Imthere 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women get paid like men when doing mens work.

Mothers work less, and don't get paid to be mothers.

Those two sound bites explain the wage gap in a way that's memorable, and hopefully easy for feminists to understand.

[–]AlwaysABride 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

So long as she’s getting the work done, her supervisors will think she’s doing a good job.

Yes. Full Stop.

The author uses that statement to explain why the "wage gap" in business (standard hours) is greater than in science (set your own hours).

But you don't need to parse the statement. The statement is true of all employees, of all genders, in all industries, regardless of standard or flexible schedules: So long as she’s getting the work done, her supervisors will think she’s doing a good job.

That's the end of the story. Supervisors don't really care about the specific hours you work, the number of hours you work, your gender, your haircut, your attitude; all they care about is whether or not your doing the work you were hired to do (and more broadly, whether or not you bring more value to the business than you cost).

[–]Flavius_Stilicho 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's the end of the story. Supervisors don't really care about the specific hours you work, the number of hours you work, your gender, your haircut, your attitude; all they care about is whether or not your doing the work you were hired to do (and more broadly, whether or not you bring more value to the business than you cost).

That is simply not true. Employers DO care about WHEN your work gets done. When the work gets done is often as important as HOW it gets done. And, many offices still have an unwritten rule requiring "face time" on the weekends, to show you are dedicated and available to take on new projects at a moments notice.

[–]AlwaysABride 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That all boils down to "getting the job done". If "face time" is necessary for the job, then having that "face time" is part of "getting the job done".

[–]franklindeer 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Beyond that it's just a wildly general statement. If you're in an industry where there are long hours to meet deadlines then you can't expect to keep bankers hours. In those industries getting the work done isn't much good if it's done late and unless women are super-human they'll also need to put in long hours to meet deadlines on occasion.

[–]splodgenessabounds 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The highest-paying jobs disproportionately reward those who can work the longest, least flexible hours...These types of job penalize workers who have caregiving responsibilities outside the workplace. Those workers tend to be women.

This would approximate to a reasonable description of the way things actually are, were it not for two words: "disproportionately " and "penalize". These are weasel words, words that seem to be merely descriptive but which are actually unnecessary, emotive and pejorative.

Don't believe me? Read the text again, but delete the word "disproportionately". Then it becomes "The highest-paying jobs reward those who can work the longest, least flexible hours" which is simply a statement of fact (and I should bloody well hope it is too).

Without the catchword "disproportionately", the allegation that it's (mostly) women being "penalized" becomes highly questionable - since it's simply a matter of rewarding those who work the longest, least flexible hours, there is merely a reward not a penalty and thus no-one is being penalized.

Remember also: when a woman is off work and at home looking after the baby or young children, someone needs to be out there doing as much overtime and working as many unsocial hours as possible to bring the bacon home. Guess whose job that is? (rhetorical). Guess who cops the boo! unfair! Muh WAGE GAP!! Patriarchy!!! blame? (rhetorical).

[–]iHeartCandicePatton 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's surprising to see from Vox

[–]thrway_1000 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[Archive of Article Here.]

 


Please think of archiving links to sites that are known to have biased and/or negative representations of men, masculinity, and men's rights -- i.e. The Guardian, Slate, The Telegraph, The Independent, Cracked, BuzzFeed, Vox, Vice, Bustle, Medium, Mic, Huffington Post, Salon, Think Progress, Raw Story, and so on. Or to articles and/or sources that may be controversial, which may be altered and/or removed because of our current culture of censorship. https://archive.is/

[–]IMPatrickH 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've been trying to make a strong economic argument for paid paternal leave with respect to closing the gender wage gap over on this articles cross post in /r/economics since yesterday:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/4vny6w/the_truth_about_the_gender_wage_gap/

I wasn't too aware of /r/mensrights before seeing that this article was posted over here but I think that what I've been advocating for, economically, is of interest to the subscribers of this sub.

[–]Archibald_Andino 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It fascinates me how these articles always compare the averages and not a true apples to apples comparison. They know they are diliberately misleading to promote their agenda because no one would really care if they said the truth, "equally qualified women are paid ~$.97 for every dollar a man earns, the difference is likely due to negotiations".

[–]UndecidedThrownaway 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I saw this because based Milo posted it on Facebook, Vox needs to be quick to correct the record because people are seeing this garbage HAHAH

[–]eixan 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

As Goldin put it in her speech, "The gender gap in pay would be considerably reduced and might even vanish if firms did not have an incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who worked long hours and worked particular hours."

This right here is why people accuse the feminism of being a socialist movement. I hear hear this shit coming out of people's mouth as if it'says cheque. Why the fucking hel should companies subsidize your childcare choices?

Yes I realize that the article does argue later that women are exspected to do more childcare. But this sentence is clearly judging these companies for wanting workers who work more flexible hours

[–]James32015[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Feminism is super socialist. I'm all for maternity and paternity leave but some of these people think they should be able to go out on leave, and get that promotion as if they were never gone.

[–]eixan 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes I know I mentioned it in my comment but it bares repeating they've managed to make this exact sentiment fetch. WTF Like it's one of those things yell often find some people in public blindly nodding their head too. That's crazy

[–]grasshopa 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Great article.

[–]_deathvader_ 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Maybe all the stick figure drawings will finally help these feminists understand the "wage gap".

[–]James32015[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

It was feminist leaning enough that maybe they will actually read it

[–]stop_stalking_me 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

It was a little too feminist leaning IMO. Saying things like the wage gap exists but we really can't prove it.

[–]James32015[S] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I agree. Didn't really like the bit about making all hours equal. Some people are just going to work more than others and should be compensated more

[–]girlwriteswhat 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Working inconvenient shifts should pay more than convenient ones, because fewer people are willing to work them.

Not everything is about productivity. The guy who works day shift at 7/11 probably earns less per hour than the guy who works graveyard, even though graveyards are less busy and bring in less money for the company, and are therefore less productive. Why? Because it's a graveyard, yo. No one wants to work those to begin with. And because it's a 7/11, yo, and 3AM is when weirdos are more likely to come in and start waving knives around. The hours are hours no one wants, and there are risks that deter even people who might be willing to work those hours. Competition for those hours is zero. The company has to beg for people to fill them. How else do you do that if you don't offer more money to compensate for the inconvenience and risk?

Her discussion of how pharmacies have evolved was a good one. My pharmacy is open from 9AM to 8:30PM, and that's great for me, for the store, and for pharmacists who don't want to work bankers' hours. But it was the market that changed that, not some social engineering project devised by government.

The one thing I did like about the Harvard economist's position is that she's not advocating that. She's describing how the market could change in certain ways, and maybe even saying how she thinks it should change, but she's not asking for government intervention, nor does she think it's the way to go.

[–]Swiggy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Why? Because it's a graveyard, yo.

Yes but people with MBA's don't usually get paid by the hour, except maybe some consultants. Usually salary and bonus compensation structure.

[–]buildallthethings 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

And who gets bigger bonuses? People who work more and produce more.

[–]Swiggy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Have to get rid of the bonus system then. Not fair.

[–]buildallthethings 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, because rewarding people who sacrifice their time to add more value to the business is totally unfair.

[–]ABC_Florida 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In a sense that goes against gender equality. YES! /S

[–]splodgenessabounds 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have to get rid of the bonus system then. Not fair

Go right ahead. But don't piss and moan when nothing gets done beyond 9-5 or above and beyond the job description.

[–]Demonspawn 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Life isn't fair.

Don’t be upset by the result you didn’t get with the work you didn’t do.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter