Question

duhhhh · 2022-02-06T16:02:40+00:00

It is true. Those saying the reason is the patriarchy/sexism against women are full of it.

Doubling the available workforce in a field reduces the wages employers need to pay to attract talent. Immigrant work visas also suppress wages for the same reason. It isn't discrimination against women or citizens, it is about supply and demand in the workforce.

Before age 30 women slightly out earn men. Then women work less hours/less stressful jobs after having kids and men work more/more dangerous jobs/higher stress jobs to make up the difference for the family.

In the world of birth control for family planning, wealthy families can afford to have more children and still maintain a good lifestyle. Moderate income families often stop having more kids if it would impinge harshly on their lifestyle. So higher income families can afford to have more kids, not additional kids earn the fathers more patriarchy dollars.

So it is all true. The stated reasons are usually propaganda not based in reality.

Halafax · 2022-02-06T16:04:57+00:00

Men are judged for their income much more than women are. Men pursue higher earning jobs and leave jobs where wages are falling. Men work more hours, are much more likely to change jobs for a higher wage, and have longer commutes. Men are more willing to sacrifice quality of life to pursue a higher wage.

You can look at the numbers and claim they mean that magical penis power inflates wages, but that's not reasonable. Men are chasing value.

The earning power of mothers vs fathers is kind of similar. Men don't magically get raises when kids are on the way, they trade in quality of life to find a higher paying job. More money is needed, they attempt to earn more. Women tend to go the opposite direction and sacrifice income to spend more time with the children. There are a combination of different factors involved.

You post these feminists talking points every couple of days, and always frame them in the most misandrist way possible. What purpose do you think doing doing this achieves?

TrilIias · 2022-02-06T16:51:14+00:00

Claudia Goldin from Harvard has done a lot of research on the wage gap. She points out that there is a loose correlation between women joining an industry and the average income for both men and women going down within that industry, but that doesn't always happen.

Really, you see the income of a given industry go down when the industry undergoes changes (usually driven by technology) which allow for more flexibility for the workers. Flexibility is often just another word for replaceability. Goldin often uses the example of pharmacy. It used to be that people wanted to know their pharmacist like they know their doctors. They wanted that personal relationship with a specific pharmacist, but there's only one of a specific pharmacist. That makes it difficult for that pharmacist to work limited hours or only between 8 to 5 on weekdays. Most people won't have access to said pharmacist because they are also busy during those hours, so they'll find someone who works longer hours or more undesirable hours, but will have to pay extra for it.

And people were willing to pay extra for it, but not anymore. That industry has shifted, and is now more accessible to people who don't want to work as long. Since we don't care about the personal relationship anymore, any pharmacist will work, so pharmacists can work in shifts. There might still be extra pay for those who work late hours, but it isn't necessary for all pharmacists to do so. Flexibility is more important to women than to men, so this change to the industry made pharmacy look like a more desirable career to women, and hence we've seen both an increase in female pharmacists, and an overall decrease in the average income for both male and female pharmacists.

This isn't because we value women's work less than men's. Feminists get the correlation right, but they get the causation backwards.

Angryasfk · 2022-02-06T17:56:13+00:00

Let’s say it is. Is it cause, or effect? He gets a better job or a promotion and so he and his wife decide they can at last have kid, or the second one, or third! Which comes first?

Certainly if a man has kids, he tends to focus more on work to pay for them (I’m assuming we’re talking about “intact families” here).

For women there’s the obvious issues. They have to take a break from work around the time of birth. There’s no getting around that. And then there’s the issue of breastfeeding. And given that the they’ve spent 6 months at home with their own infant, are new mothers then going to want to put in extra long hours and spend even less time of they do go back to work.

Besides in my city daycares close at 6:00pm. So if she’s putting in overtime, she’s almost certainly going to be hit with late fees so someone else can experience raising her own baby!

Not surprised that women may tend to “ease off” with the work when they have new children, and this doesn’t include the cost of daycare.

Now feminists may moan that “men should step up”. But apart from things like the fact men don’t lactate, feminists are really consistent on this idea of men with children are they!

Ballad_of_Eva_Green · 2022-02-07T02:59:21+00:00

I've not seen any studies about this exactly, but I have been in business and I've had to write about similar things. And it really does make sense from a business standpoint.

Anytime any market is flooded with employees, the wage goes down. It has to. How else can you hire more people? And a lot of companies look at it this way:

If I pay you $20/hr to do the job and you're the only person to do it, okay.
But, if I can pay 2 people $10/hr each, then I get twice the work done for the same price.

There's a minimum wage that has to be adhered to, sadly, so there's always that base minimum. So even though they'd like to hire 4 people for $5 each, they can't. But they can always go with the cheapest alternative, even if it means quality suffers.

Also, because men and women are biologically wired differently, women are more of a liability in the workforce.

Women are more likely to call in, take personal days, use sick time, and take maternity leave (obviously). They tend to use vacation more, and even tend to cause a lot more trouble for the HR department, as women tend to be the ones who complain about stupid work conditions (like type of chair vs actual safety concern). And that doesn't take into account that women are more likely to report perceived harassment, when men won't even really report actual harassment.

Statistically speaking, you're more likely to have more difficulties with female employees than male employees. All of this, from revamping the office to the extra hours in HR costs more money, too. Meaning that profits go into said things rather than salaries, meaning raises and bonuses are smaller.

On the flip side, a father with multiple kids would probably earn more because men will work harder for their families where women are more likely to take off more time with larger families.

If a man has 5 kids, he will ask for any extra shifts they have available. He will tell people point blank "I have 5 kids, I want a raise." He will put his hat in the race for promotions. He will make it known that he wants more money or he will walk; so he gets it. Men are way better at negotiation than women statistically speaking, so that undoubtedly plays a part, too.

If a woman has 5 kids, she will use that same excuse to ask for fewer hours, to give away shifts, to ask for more days off, etc. It's the opposite, because we are wired to behave differently. We're supposed to be complimentary to each other.

TAPriceCTR · 2022-02-06T18:25:49+00:00

Women work for self fulfillment, men work to provide women that luxury. When her self fulfillment includes less income, he must make up that deficit... and he does.

Liberal_On_Guns · 2022-02-06T16:15:46+00:00

Yes. Turns out most women don't actually want househusbands. Who could have predicted this?

SweatyAdvance · 2022-02-06T15:46:51+00:00

It is said? By who? What industries?

Mr---Noodles · 2022-02-06T21:29:13+00:00

its more about the child care laws for women where they can take off from work and still get paid for no work

stingermamabee · 2022-02-07T12:40:52+00:00

I'll be honest, I don't know the logistical reason, but I will give you my assumed reason based on experience.

My fiance and I both worked full time. When I got pregnant, I had to work far less hours because of a high risk pregnancy. Bills went up, my hours went down, and his went up for the incoming baby.

Our son was born, yet again, my hours went down and his went up. Rather than work MORE hours to make the difference in loss of wages, his salary went up instead and he was given a higher position.

The difference is probably in the fact that when there are kids, most women work less, or we work easier jobs during recovery and early maternal stages while the man has to work either harder positions or pick up more hours. This is multiplied the more times it has to happen and the more mouths that have to be fed.

None of this is unreasonable in my opinion, but they should really think about giving men the opportunity to experience early paternity instead of punishing them with harsher work for not much more salary for choosing to have a family.

Another individual commented about how we are wired differently to where women will ask for more free time, while men ask for less. And I don't disagree with that.

So why would I be paid the same salary as my fiance, but call out more often? From the standpoint of an employer...that's just ridiculous.

Title	Question
Author	bloodfuel
Upvotes	1
Comments	36
Date	February 6, 2022 3:43 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/slznyy/question/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/question.1099420 https://theredarchive.com/post/1099420

Comments