Gender pay gap

Compulsive behaviour, like following me from thread to thread.

What do you think MNHQ will make of posts like this one from you:

"Fmsfms, honestly you are an absolute tedious fucking bore. What are you even doing here, droning on at women that don't want to listen to you?" and "This whole thread has been shat on by this seagull." and "fmsfms is talking out of his manly crack." and "if fffffsss comes back waving his willy around mansplaining again"

If they haven't done anything about that one yet, and the others I reported yesterday, what makes you think they'll do anything about me pointing out logical fallacies in peoples posts, how exactly does that breach the code of conduct?

lol

I've reported this to MNHQ.

It seems quite compulsive behaviour, but even so, it's out of place here, and destroying more threads than just this one.

@bluebug45

Small sample sizes and anecdotes aren't proof of anything. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you to grasp.

I'm also not sure why you admit that social science methods involve small samples and expect me to take them seriously, especially when I've already provided many many actual scientific studies and have posted sources that used hundreds of thousands and millions of subjects lol

Once again until it sinks in

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

anecdotal
You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.
It's often much easier for people to believe someone's testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more 'abstract' statistical reality

@fmsfms you have just proved to everyone on the thread you don't understand how most data is collected for social sciences.

Incidentally some people here will have done work using primary sources that disapproves your claims on the pay gap, but you would disregard them claiming they are ancedotes because they aren't a professor - well how do you think professors do their studies?

Oh and you aren't discussing anything. If you were you would be able to see there are other things in their posts, which if you weren't so blinkered, may help you prove or disprove the points you are trying to make.

@bluebug45

"social science studies unlike natural science studies are generally done on people's experiences, and some such studies are done on very small sample sizes. "

If you meant to counter my claim re anecdotes then you've not done a very good job - you've just reminded me why I don't take gender/social studies seriously

It's not my opinion, anecdotal experience is a logical fallacy, hence linking you to an explanation

If everyone could say "well I know someone that " instead of providing compelling evidence then we would never have productive discussions

@tanith

"What’s interesting is that, at the high end, the situation changes. It seems that men are more than happy to work in Early Years if the position is a dominant one. They are the owners, the entrepreneurs, the editors, the leaders, the government heads. "

I believe the Yellow Dot nursery chain had a pay gap in favour of women. I assume it's because there is an over supply of women staff, therefore women more likely to get promoted. Just one company of course

I think the Nordic country paradox is interesting.

One thing about the Nordic countries is that they have very large public sectors (because of their high rates of tax and high levels of social capital). Workers in the public sector tend to be disproportionately female, while the private sector skews towards men.

The Nordic countries thus have very high female workforce participation rates as so many women work in the public sector, but their gender pay gap record is only so-so (because public sector workers tend to earn less--partly as a trade-off in return for more family-friendly hours and career structures).

@fmsfms social science studies unlike natural science studies are generally done on people's experiences, and some such studies are done on very small sample sizes. So to keep coming out with the line ancedotes aren't compelling evidence is meaningless when talking about human experience.

If you actually asked myself and others questions instead of coming out with statements in attempt to make yourself look clever you may come out with better arguments that either support or disapprove your theories.

Someone mentioned nursery workers a few posts back.

Early Years and childcare is quite a new sector. It’s one that has struggled to attract men, usually thought to be due to the low status and low pay. There have been a lot of initiatives to bring men into the sector and it’s still a female-dominated one - at the workface.

What’s interesting is that, at the high end, the situation changes. It seems that men are more than happy to work in Early Years if the position is a dominant one. They are the owners, the entrepreneurs, the editors, the leaders, the government heads.

It’s been fascinating watching them assert themselves.

It is a sign of my age and infirmity that on threads with this sort of person the line from Laugh In repeats in the back of my mind. "Here come da Judge! Here come da Judge".

I could, but I'm not going to because we've all seen your type of posts before and they have been discussed and counter-arguments put forward, none of which the seagull JP fanaticals engage with.

It just makes for a really boring, frustrating thread.

It's much better when it's more of a discussion between people who understand the structural oppression of women (everywhere, including Scandinavia), because then you realise the limitations of the studies posted by you, and can have a much more enlightening discussion.

@bluebug45

"my opinion based on my experience I find my paid work much easier than looking after a group of children."

As I mentioned earlier, anecdotal experiences are not compelling evidence

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

@SonicVersusGynaephobia

Congrats on making it to the list of people that can't debate my points or the multiple studies I've posted, and can only resort to ad hominem attacks

@bluebug45

"I was making the point that is not necessarily true as it depends on the actual role"

I wasn't the one that brought up construction paying more than nursery work, but yes I did speculate why that might be the case

If you're saying that it isn't always true that construction pays more than that disproves the original poster to bring up this comparison

Damn, started reading the thread, thought "this is really interesting, I hope one of the JP Bots doesn't arrive and take over the whole thread with his nonsense", read a few more posts, and then... Yep.

Waddabore.

fmsfms
We have no idea what your gender identity is. What we see is your behavior.

@fmsfms you were the one arguing the point that construction work is paid more because it involves working out doors in dangerous environments and more physically strenuous compared to nursery work.

I was making the point that is not necessarily true as it depends on the actual role whether it is more strenuous or not plus how regulated the industry is on what the company can get away with paying. Others have made the point that skilled qualified jobs tend to be paid higher but those where women dominate a particularly industrial sector are paid less than those where men dominate.

In regards to people like project managers, quantity surveyors and structural engineers - who work in the construction industry - finding looking after children harder than their paid job it is their opinion based on their experience. I'm female and work in a male dominated role, and in my opinion based on my experience I find my paid work much easier than looking after a group of children.

@Picassospaintbrush Probably posting at work.

That's rich considering all you've done is attack me and assume my gender

Why haven't you taken me up on my £100 offer to quote me saying "there is no pay gap" yet

Probably because I never said that

Has he gone? Honestly I don't really get what he thinks he is doing, he just ruins the conversation.

What @Bowlofbabelfish said about Sweden - very interesting!

fms, if you were to bother clicking the two links in my first post, you'd see what training and qualifications are required for each job and perhaps better understand what I was trying to say. If you wanted to.

"I can specifically think of two such roles where I know men and women that do both. The men actually have children and find looking after their children much harder than doing their paid work."

Anecdotal

"Also you seem unaware that there is lots of illegal off the books manual work in construction, as well as plenty of self-employment. This is paid lower than the minimum wage."

I wasn't the one that brought up construction pay vs nursery pay.

@fmsfms not all construction jobs are low paid and as physically demanding as working in a nursery.

I can specifically think of two such roles where I know men and women that do both. The men actually have children and find looking after their children much harder than doing their paid work.

Also you seem unaware that there is lots of illegal off the books manual work in construction, as well as plenty of self-employment. This is paid lower than the minimum wage.

Nurseries can't get away with it due to being more tightly regulated.

So stating that nursery workers are paid less than construction workers because it's a less physically dangerous and physically active job isn't true as. companies pay as little as they can get away with.

So we agree then

No I don’t think we do. Does mansplaining on a professional level pay more or less than dive bombing for chips? The seagulls in Aberdeen are particularly persistent I find. They just keep on going

@Bowlofbabelfish "The danger level of a job has very little to do with status or pay. It’s supply and demand. "

So we agree then, it's supply and demand - which means the market sets the rates. If there's not enough supply of workers then they need to increase demand, which they do by paying more. If supply gets too high then they obviously can get away with reducing wages.

Which is how we arrived at the current market rates of nursery and construction workers.

And of course danger level, environment and working conditions have plenty to do with pay –

If you’re a cleaner and the company you work for has contracts with a mens prison and a school, then clearly most people are going to prefer to work in the school. Thus the company might have to offer a prison uplift to get people to do the same job in a less hospitable environment.

Same for people working nights – they get paid more than people doing the same job during the day.

What if your employer asks you to go Saudi Arabia to live on a compound?

What if you do 6 weeks on 6 weeks off on an oil rig?