From a cynical or lets say just pragmatical employer´s point of view it makes a lot of sense. If a woman is still in her childbearing years the employer could consider there is a risk she would interrupt her employment for maternity leave, child sickness leave etc so they cannot always count on her delivering the job.

dont waste your time. female chauvinists will never change their mind. as if all heterosexual cis males are the same. pure bigotry of a matriarchal misandrist that forgot to check her privilege.

Manly? I do believe you've totally missed the point here totally - indeed.

You brought gay and transgender men into the discussion in an overly vague and unclear way... It's down to you to explain what you actually mean.

This is a longish read, slightly nsfw. Not exactly about international women's day, but explains the way many women (myself included) feel about feminism and the man/woman divide, such as it does, or does not exist.

http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/adv...caitlin-moran/

Don't mind sharing, we like to rock the boat here across the pond, We had this discussion recently as my OH (man) and I (woman) are preparing to establish our household here very soon We are thinking of various combinations that involve both reducing work/increasing our home time. We are trying to be realistic and prioritize what we truly care about, and delegate/outsource the rest to someone else.

I posted the below on the working moms/SAHMs thread, so I will just be lazy and copy myself:

My OH and I have talked about what we will do when we have children (hopefully soon) – neither of us wants to completely stop working, but we would also like to spend considerable amount of time with our child(ren). The potential solutions we are thinking about are the following, to be applied in a variety of combinations: hiring a full-time housekeeper, he “retiring early” from his formal job, but continuing to collaborate via research/collecting royalties for his patents, me taking advantage of one of the various flexible work options offered by my employer, such as partial work from home, straight up part-time work. My OH keeping his full time job and me leaving my employer, establishing my own small business/ small advisory practice. My parents have also talked about spending periods of various months here in the USA (and in South America where my brother is) each year, upon my dad’s retirement. I think what we ultimately settle on will depend on the circumstances we are in when we do have child(ren), but for sure we are thinking about it.

Could some EF posters get their knickers in a twist over this Autoscout advert?

Personally, I find all SUVs to be womanly, and NOT manly!

Tom

"Gay men and transgender people are more equals than less real men" ― Odile

Somehow I feel like an historical quote has just been made... a bit like this one:

"“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein"

Not every day you read a man-hating diatribe like that, but on your last comment, where you imply that domestic violence is a simply a male on female issue, you probably should check your facts first:

"In 2013, the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that from a sample of 16,000 U.S. adults, 26% of homosexual men, 37.3% of bisexual men, and 29% of heterosexual men had been a victim of intimate partner violence, compared to 43.8% of lesbians, 61.1% of bisexual women and 35% of heterosexual women." Source.

Strangely not only are rates if domestic violence against men by women comparable to the reverse, but women in a relationship with another woman are more likely to suffer violence than if in a relationship with a man.

Perhaps you should concentrate on that elephant in the room and stop spouting bigoted, misandrist offal.
Hypocrite - your post was noting more than attack on men, playing down issues that affect men and blaming them for all of women's ills.

That might be due to the fact that women in relationship with a man are less willing to report domestic incidents - especially when they are families with children and the man is the bread winner.

I would even venture guessing that a woman in an open relationship with another woman is better educated than the average and financially independent.

Turns out "Lesbian violence" returns a lot of blocked links if you Google it at work

Try this one: "woman better educated than the average and financially independent", I only got 1 result, and it's not my mum!

And in a lesbian relationship one cannot also be the breadwinner? And why would a woman in a relationship with a man be less willing to report domestic incidents? If anything, the problem is that men are less willing to report domestic incidents when the aggressor is a woman because they'd either be laughed out of it or presumed to be at fault.
Ironically, I'm having a drink with a lesbian who broke up with her partner recently and is looking for advice on her CV / job applications, as she's not had to work for years. So feel free to venture all you like, if it fits your agenda.

Isn't it a bit early for a drink?

Tom

For a man, maybe. Not for a lesbian, gay or even a transgender. They are more real than others.

Upps, I left out 'this evening'

OK this is my last attempt. I may need to reconsider my choice of job as I apparently can't build an argument that others understand

I agree with all this.

I don't like aggregated numbers on male vs female salaries as they don't take into account that exact issue, i.e. that many, many women choose to work in low-paid jobs with little "career" progression (whatever the hell that means) to begin with. Everyone knows a hairdresser won't bring home 150k a year nor have a high-flying career. I have no sympathy or tolerance for anyone choosing a rather low-paid job and then attributing that pay to the fact that they're a woman (or have a certain nationality, skin color, height or whatever else it may be). In fact, this exact messing up of facts is probably a reason why this continues to be a hot button issue.

Mediocre or bad salaries in some jobs that just happen to be filled predominantly by women is NOT gender discrimination, not to me anyway. The bigger question of course is the general fairness of salaries (whole different topic though) and why many women choose those jobs (yet another whole different topic).

However, to go with your example, it would be discrimination if a male kindergarten teacher and a female kindergarten teacher work in the same team at the same school in the same role and the male earns 15% more.

Of course someone will say "but that is probably because the woman has been away for 14 weeks twice for maternity leave". No, again, not all women have children, so while that MAY be a sort-of-but-not-really (more to that in a minute) explanation in SOME cases, it is not in ALL. Also, as of a certain point, the years of experience and, more importantly, the educational background become somewhat redundant or less important, especially if there's little vertical career movement anyway. That means that it will hardly matter whether a 45-year old kindergarten teacher has worked as in that very profession for 24 years or 25 years.

Now of course in very fast-moving environments, that may indeed be different and a year away from the job (whether it's to have children, to go travelling, for education, due to illness or anything else) may stall a person's "career". However, then that same person who was away for a year is unlikely to end up in the exact same job as the one who hasn't been away anyway. But let's be honest, most industries aren't exactly so fast-moving that a few months away from the job would make a real difference.

My point is still what I said before: not all salary differences can be explained away by choices the woman made outside the job. There is salary discrimination, but of course not between a kindergarten teacher and the division head of an MNC (as said, apples-oranges), but within the same jobs in the same settings where there are no explanations other than implicit assumptions about a woman's priorities (some of which can also be seen here: all women want/have children, all woman will work less when they have children, all women will stay home 5 times a month because the child is sick etc.). And that type of discrimination probably doesn't happen with the sales staff in Migros or the hairdressers at the salon around the corner or the teachers at the local school, but it sure does happen as of a certain seniority level in larger corporations, I'm afraid. And I'm not sure why some pretend it doesn't.

I think the problem a lot of educated people (both women and men) have with this opinion, is the general apathy of saying: Since we've ruled out education, job role, work history, age, there is ABSOLUTELY no other reason that pay scales are different rather than because of one's gender.


Extremely short sighted and really fits the concept of affirmative bias. If this was indeed the case, job interviews would only require a short list of those items and the job would be given at the stated salary.


Of course we all know that jobs applications consist of many in person interviews--these are to gauge the skills and personalities that are not as easy to quantify. In these variable I believe one will be able to see differences that might correlate with gender.


Of course it's not absolute, but there are some traits that are more common in women than in men. NOTE I say it's not absolute--and it's common/uncommon.

__________________
"You have reached the end of you free trial membership at BenjaminFranklinQuotes.com" -Benjamin Franklin