36 Responses

  1. Dan in Philly says:

    Let’s have “equal consumption day” which shows that women consume the same amount as a man on average and yet earn less, meaning a man has to work an extra 1/3 of his life just to consume as much as a woman.

    • Toads says:

      Most of what men earn is eventually transferred to women. If the man is lucky, that woman is his current wife, and even treats him well..

      But otherwise, either via government or court order, much of what men produce goes to women. That is why the male poverty rate is so much higher than the female poverty rate.

      93% of workplace deaths are of men too.

      • morganovich says:

        seriously toads, do you just make this stuff up or what?

        the poverty rate for us women over 18 is 14.6% vs 10.9% for men.

        i have no idea where you get these “facts” but you need a new source.

        10 seconds with google will show you how wrong you are.

        • Grogli says:

          1. Money
          (there are other sources, but I’m lazy)

          2. Poverty rate
          Now, use google to find out the gender distribution of the homeless.

          It’s interesting how you quickly jumped over the whole “glass cellar” thing.

        • ManWalk says:

          “Seriously toads” Anyone remember MeMe from Drew Carey? That’s how I read this trolls post.

        • Max B says:

          Uh, what the hell? Where are you getting your stats? Official stats in Canada for example, 70% of homeless people are men.

          In fact, upon searching google for like 10 sources for homeless stats in USA and Canada, every single source says that there are at least 2-3x as many homeless men than women.

          Not sure if you’re a liar or just retarded

        • Alan says:

          There’s poverty, and poverty. More extreme poverty – i.e. homeless, living-on-the-street poverty, experienced by men. More below-the-official-poverty-line-but-can-afford-at-least-a-lousy-place-to-live may be experienced by women.

    • David Lavery says:

      its time women were forced to defend there country in wartime, then they will know what equality is.

      • Expendable Henchman says:

        I strongly recommend the following essay by Colonel Tom Kratman.


        To summarize, an infantry commander, who later went JAG, then professional author, had plenty of problems with women in combat units. Pregnancies right after deployment announcements, pregnancies during deployments, men cover for women instead of doing their own jobs, defacto prostitution, etc…

        He makes some excellent points. Well worth the read.

      • Taylor says:

        Uhm…I honestly don’t see how this is relevant to the article. Plus, women being “forced” to defend their country? Not even men are forced to defend their country. We haven’t had the draft in a long time. We have enough volunteers that I really don’t anticipate one anytime soon. Also, there are more of us women in the military than you think. Last I heard, we make up about 20% of the Army at least. Probably a little more in AF, CG, and Navy. While it’s not even by any means, there’s lots of women who voluntarily serve their country. Plus “equality” in the military? HA fat chance. The men see women in the military as a joke. Joining the military will not all of a sudden open up women’s eyes to what equality is.

  2. Toads says:

    Prof. Perry said,

    To claim that a significant portion of the raw wage gap can only be explained by discrimination is intellectually dishonest and completely unsupported by the empirical evidence. And yet we hear all the time from groups like the National Committee on Pay Equity, the American Association of University Women, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, and even Presidents Obama and Carter that women “are paid 77 cents for every dollar paid to men.”

    This sentence indicates that Prof. Perry still thinks the purveyors of this ‘pay gap’ lie care about facts or logic. They do not. This myth will never go away…

    And why should it, when it is so politically useful, and women have shown that they will always vote for what feels good at any given time.

    • Greg G says:


      Apparently you have been traumatized at some point in the past by a woman who did “what feels good.” It’s good how you are getting over that. You might want to consider the possibility that all women aren’t the same.

      • Niika.N says:

        If a significant portion of a group wants something, the best way to attract votes from them is to use that something as a carrot. Women, happen to be the largest group of voters, so attracting female voters will always be a valid political strategy. Wether or not the gender gap is real, or the fact that there are women who do not care about it is not very important when aiming to win an election.

        • Toads says:

          or the fact that there are women who do not care about it is not very important when aiming to win an election.


          And as I point out, there are only a minimal number of Republican women who care to point out that the ‘pay gap’ is a lie, even though such a myth harms women’s employment prospects.

          This lack of opposition from the majority of women, even women who vote Republican, is the main point.

      • Toads says:

        You might want to consider the possibility that all women aren’t the same.

        No, but enough are the same that you don’t see any opposition to the ‘gender pay gap’ myth from about 99% of women, even though such a myth harms women (by inducing employers to avoid hiring them and their associated lawsuit risk).

        Look how few women there are bringing up the issues that Dr. Helen brings up.

    • I totally understand that the gender activists and feminists (and Obama and his supporters) don’t really care about facts, logic or empirical evidence. But it’s still important to point this out as often as possible, and try to counteract their lack of facts/evidence with facts/evidence/data, etc. I’ve got a lifetime of work ahead of me.

      • morganovich says:


        also, many people do care about facts and evidence.

        thus, it is very important that such things be made available and the arguments based on them foregrounded in clear, rational fashion.

        while one may not be able to change the mind of a zealot, one can change the mind of a well intentioned, rational person who simply may not have seen the facts before.

        this is doubly important in the face of one sided media coverage.

        mark provide a very valuable service in this respect and it is no less so for being unable to reach the 5% of zealots who are never going to change their minds.

      • marmico says:

        Someone who “really cares[s] about facts, logic or empirical evidence” would note the residual (wage discrimination) gender gap after application of the ceteris paribus condition.

        Is it Goldin’s nonlinearity with respect to temporal flexibility of hours or are you just a bought and paid for political operative?

        • Chad Lancaster says:

          <5% can be explained away through many other means other than discrimination and there is this thing called "Standard Deviation" in calculating statistics like these.

          Also note:

          "Further, for the group of full-time workers who work 35-39 hours per week, women earned 111.3% of what their male counterparts earned in 2012, and therefore for that group there was an 11.3% pay gap in favor of women."

          • marmico says:

            Well it would be de riguer to have a cite, Chad.

            I give kudos to Perry. He should clean up his own house first, though. The ratio of male to female scholars at AEI is 20:1, even though the ratio of male to female master’s and doctorates is 1:1.

            Arthur Brooks must make more dough than all the female administrative assistants at AEI combined. That would be about 60 of them at $40 grand a year.

          • morganovich says:


            have you missed the whole discussion here?

            what is it that mark has said that would require him to “clean up his own house”?

            he is not criticizing others for hiring or payment, he’s doing to opposite.

          • Ron H. says:

            m: “what is it that mark has said that would require him to “clean up his own house”?

            It’s always hard to tell with marmico, but I can only guess that he considers AEI to be Mark’s “house”, therefore any ratio of men to women employees that’s different from the ratio of men to women in the general population, is a problem that needs to be fixed – by Mark.

        • morganovich says:

          also note:

          goldin did not correctly adjust for hours.

          she used “full time” as over 35 hours a week and “full year” as over 40 weeks a year, but does not control for the fact that far more men that women work over 40 hours and far more women than men work between 35-40.

          thus, it is leaving out key salients and misses the “ceteris paribus” conditions in a way that systematically skews its results.

          • marmico says:

            Now that I have been culled (deleted) and morganovich is the “key salient”, I will repeat. The American Enterprise Institute is a misogynist organization perpetuating the residual gender wage gap.

          • morganovich says:

            “Now that I have been culled (deleted) and morganovich is the “key salient”, I will repeat. The American Enterprise Institute is a misogynist organization perpetuating the residual gender wage gap.”

            is this even intended to make sense?

            how is AEI misogynist?

            do you have even a shred of proof or even a rational argument?

            it sure seems like you do not.

            not all outcomes that are not evenly spread by gender are a sign of discrimination.

  3. Gil says:

    So the determining factor that separates “all things being equal” is children. And then folks wonder why sub-replacement birth rates exist?

    • Paul says:

      It’s even worse. Fertility in America and other western countries is highly dysgenic. The higher the IQ, the lower the fertility, and vice-versa.

      “Birth rates for women on welfare are three times higher than for those who are not on welfare. Within a single year, the census survey found that unmarried women had twice as high a birth rate as married women. These demographics help perpetuate poverty and feed a welfare death spiral in which more money has to be spent on social services for a less productive tax base.”


  4. matt says:

    numbers dont lie, bitches.

  5. LindaF says:

    This also doesn’t address a REALLY common difference in men’s vs. women’s work – women are FAR more likely to have health and other benefits in full-time work than men. Many women work that job just for the bennies, which allows their husband to work a more lucrative job.

    • Ron H. says:


      Yes, on average women are more interested in security, and are more risk averse than men. That’s neither a good thing nor a bad thing – it just IS. Men and women are *different*. Imagine that!

  6. Mastro says:

    Just heard a friend was living in Switzerland. She has an outstanding CV- MBA at Duke- good jobs in her twenties, etc.

    She is now a stay-at-home mom in Switzerland. Sure- part of this is that her husband has the work visa- she does not- but basically you have a woman making $0 where her husband makes a nice mid six figures. But a lot of women married to high earning men give up their careers.

    How does THAT skew the %?

    • Ron H. says:


      That’s almost the entire issue of why men make more than women. It is not as often practical, or in their best interest, for a husband to stay home while his wife goes to work. On average, that works at odds with their natural predilections and aptitudes.

      To avoid criticism from those who think men and women are identical in every way, you might, rather than attributing $0 income to her, write that your friend and her husband make a nice mid six figures through co-operative specialization and division of labor.

      They both work, it’s just that he indirectly trades his labor for things they can’t reasonably provide for themselves, like food, clothing, shelter, transportation, etc.

  7. Dan D. says:

    I’ve often wondered…
    If you took a census of every college student in the US enrolled in a 4 year degree program and assigned to that student a salary equal to the average salary (regardless of gender) earned by someone who posses the degree they are working towards…would you see a gender pay gap? I think there would be a significant cap.

  8. Preston J. says:

    I’d love to see an analysis of how the fact that 90%+ of workplace fatalities interacts with rates of pay and lifetime earnings. It just makes sense that the more dangerous jobs pay more, and that men are far more likely to take those jobs.

    It’s always striking to me how often this figure is ignored in this discussion, though, and makes me wonder if those ‘men are considered disposable’ theories aren’t correct.

Leave a Reply

Mobile Theme | Switch To Regular Theme