So we all recognize that the wage gap as its usually seen "exists" because it takes averages which is heavily influenced by personal choices when it comes to career.
But more and more I've been seeing studies popping up everywhere saying that even when women enter a male dominated field the overall wages tend to drop. I was curious what the counter argument to this is.
There isn't one. It all makes sense when you realize the vast majority of feminist thought leaders belong to a certain ethnic minority that only makes up 2% of the population.
Are you saying there's no counter or that the wages don't drop? I'm confused
The counter argument is properly reading the data you fucking moron, the whole thing is a myth because people are too stupid to figure out how to read a graph. "Studies" are just propaganda.
he is saying we are living in a capitalistic world and noone is going to pay man more just becasue they have a penis and not a vagina
>doesn't post any sources
OK
>implying men shouldn't be earning more
Equality is a false god.
Now fuck off.
Umm hey sweetie.
There is no counter. The wages do drop. That way not only is there now a wedge between white women and men in politics but both of them have to work to be able to support a family. Feminism is a double edged sword stabbed into the gut of the white family and it was created by stereotypical longnose tribeswomen.
>men are better and more competent at everything they do
Color me shocked.
> didn't factor in overtime
> didn't factor in education level
I didn't post sources simply because I figured anywhere I could link to wouldn't be taken seriously and I thought it was a well known argument by now. I was just curious as to what people say other than "your numbers are wrong."
Women belong in the home rearing children. The reason there is a wage gap is because there is a performance gap. Women are simply not as good as men at all those things. Feminism is a kike meme meant to turn you away from your true calling, destroy white birthrates, and ruin family support networks for increased reliance on the state. What is more glorious a career, creating and bringing up the next generation or sitting in a cube all day making money for schlomo? If you think being a "stay at home mom" is something negative you have internalized anti-white hatred by the Jews. Wake up to your true calling before its too late and you become a lonely spinster in a house full of cats.
Greater supply = Lower price
when you control for the career itself and hours worked, the difference shrinks to about 5%. There are a number of possible contributors for the rest:
Men may make better comissions in possitions with comission pay
Men may get higher bonuses in sallaried positions
Male job tenure is marginally higher (4.3 vs 4 years median), so tenure based pay grades likely play a role
Men are more willing to work overtime
Men could be more willing and/or more successful at asking for a raise
g-goyim!!!! worry about the 'wage-gap'!!!!
don't pay attention to things like
>pic related
!!!!!!!
>But more and more I've been seeing studies popping up everywhere saying that even when women enter a male dominated field the overall wages tend to drop. I was curious what the counter argument to this is.
Na, I won't let you define the argument. Prove that shit happens first or I have nothing to refute or argue.
I can speak directly to one of these categories, "Police and sheriff patrol officers".
I've been a cop for 17 years. Wages are set in one of two ways - either by union bargaining agreement in states that have police union laws, or by a standard wage scale set by the municipality (city, county, etc.) in states that don't have collective bargaining for police.
Either way, the wage scale is set and isn't subject to variation simply because of the officer's gender (or any other factor).
In other words, the implication that wages vary for the same exact position for the same exact number of years of service is complete bullshit.
probably because productivity drops when women enter otherwise homogenous and functional teams for the sake of (((diversity)))
you go from being able to totally dedicate yourself to your job to having to dedicate at least some mental energy to placating someone irrational and emotional who can easily get you fired and blacklisted in a he said she said situation
One needs only to look at how the cost of living has risen compared to wages to see that doubling the workforce pool has had negative effects. Used to be one middle class income was plenty to support having a house, two cars, and five kids. Its basic supply and demand.
How does this image make sense?
The women make 1/3 of a dollar a man makes now?
So OP is shaping this stat of pure supply and demand and framing it in a predefined way, around it being about women, and not people, regardless of sex, flooding the markets. This argument could be made if, let's say, we are flooding the market with a bunch foreigners.
Point being, OP has a end conclusion, and is using stats to support it, instead of looking at stats and coming to a conclusion. This is how most of those shitty graphs you see everywhere work as well. And articles about stats, etc. Like 99% of the time it technically supports what they claim, but it isnt a direct result and isn't /because/ of what they claim, it just coincides with what is actually happening. Basically correlation != causation.
So I guess back to OP
, sure what you say is true in a way, but it isnt because of what you're implying, but a mere side effect. And how most feminists or people who actually claim those stats, they will most likely try to use that to push an agenda.
Because intelligent business owners can't afford to pay an underperforming diversity hire the same amount as a competent male.
Its both my breh