Everyone here agrees for the most part that the wage gap myth we get inundated with is based on incorrect data and doesn't account for lifestyle choice (leaving work for years to parent children) etc... but what I've come to understand is that the discussion we're missing is that feminists are arguing for equal pay despite lifestyle choice (which from my understanding accounts for the majority of the discrepancy).

So yes! They want the same pay even though they have fewer years of experience, less seniority and less hours.

The argument I keep hearing is how "equality" requires some groups to have special privileges (e.g. wheelchair ramps for equal access, special benefits for immigrants to help them get established, tax reductions for families with lots of kids to help them to achieve a standard of living equivalent to single people). Some of my examples are very loosely drawn but I hope it gets across the general idea. The arguments rooted behind this depiction of equality are much more fleshed out. Some of these aren't wrong. Wheelchair ramps are necessary and people who are just getting started or down and out totally need support in society.

Honestly I don't know how I feel about group rights are a "cure all" to any societal issue. Anytime I hear about group rights I know there is value in it but at the same time the devil's advocate in me is screaming that there are individuals or sub-groups who suffer and are not likely to be identified by a system like this. "The greater good" in a sort of hot fuzz-esque mantra repeated along the hillside by the advocates of group rights makes me uncomfortable and I think it is an over-simplified solution to a complex societal problem.

tl;dr I've been mulling this over for a while and decided to share my interpretation of the wage gap problem and why it doesn't go away when hit with evidence that it doesn't exist ... and that is because they're using that evidence to justify it. To understand my take on this please read the whole wall of text above.