To get my hair off with this paygap denier

[Jackfruitburger]

"I think men are more driven (in general) to get high paying jobs, whereas women tend to either do what they like doing (I.e making cakes and selling them, or run breeding and boarding kennels) or do something of service (teacher). I really do think it's innate."

Also her

"But I also don't see it as a problem that needs to be fixed - it's just the way we are and the way it is. Men and women are different."

I don't even have the words to argue back.

Tbh among people I know, generally the women are more fussed about having children than men. The men are happy to have children, but don't want to give up their careers to do so. They would rather not have children. The women are more willing to give up their careers than their chance of having children. Everyone has choices! If you don't have issues with your biological clock you can pick and choose not to have children when you can. Most women who want children don't have the that luxury.
Men would rather not have children because when they are 50+ they can still easily date 20+ woman and have children. They will be 70 and procreating if they wanted too.
I know it's not a right to have a child/children. But it's something that a lot of women want and do feel trapped by that choice based on when their body can allow them if it can at all.
You might say it's selfish to not want children but I would say it's the opposite. selfish people want children and most of us are. It's the feeling of having something which is your own. Having children is not a selfless act at all.
If it wasn't, we would not care whose child it is but look after every child like it's our own. The adoption rate would be sky high.

YANBU, she's in proper denial if she thinks the pay gap isn't real.

That's what I mean, this issue is always seen as '' women are oppressed or brainwashed into being the main carer''. How about women are almost always the ones who choose their partner according to his 'ambition' or 'drive' or 'prospects'? Or want more kids? Or want to stay at home or work part time? Or don't want to share parental lave? Are most women just flying monkeys or are they naturally inclined to have different priorities in life? It's women who enforce the patriarchy (in its 21st century, Western form), not men. Are there still inequality issues in the West ? Hell yes! But this is not a one way street, not even close. And it certainly doesn't need identity politics to figure it out or solve it.

Here's a little little nugget you can nibble on:

And my personal favorite:

www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/24/millionaire-men_n_3983741.html?guccounter=1

The site surveyed a random sample of nearly 15,000 of their members in order to discern what type of people millionaires prefer to date. The results revealed that the vast majority of millionaire men, 79.6 percent, seek out non-millionaire women, while 84.5 percent of the female millionaires would prefer to date another millionaire.

The survey also found that the rich women would be more careful with their wealth if they entered into a marriage than the rich men. Eighty-two percent of the female respondents said they would insist on a prenuptial agreement, while only 17.4 percent of the male respondents would do the same.

I think it is more accurate to call it an 'earnings gap'

And since we were on the height subject:

The likelihood that a man under 5-foot-9 is contacted by a Manhattan or Bronx woman online is a scant 1.2 percent

nypost.com/2013/12/08/short-men-dont-stack-up-with-nyc-women/

I can't complain at 6'1'' although I would have like a few extra inches (my 5'8'' wife thinks it's perfect), but damn it's a hard knock life any average guy in places where women have infinite choices. I wonder what the results would be for London. I have a feeling it wouldn't be as harsh as 1 bloody %.

I think it is more accurate to call it an 'earnings gap'

Indeed. And I have no doubt discrimination is part of it, just not what the critics make it out to be.

Somewhat related to this... I wonder how many know that the first female self-made millionaire and billionaire in the US were both black (Madam C. J. Walker and Oprah). We're not only talking about black women being a small % out of the entire population but also being the most oppressed (when the word ''oppression'' actually meant something outside liberal arts college campuses) of all categories of people you could think of. Talk about against the odds. Madam Walker was the first of her family not born as a slave and Oprah wasn't exactly born in a society where blacks or women were treated as equals. That right there tells you something about identity politics.

If it were mostly down to biology, we'd see the same patterns round the world. We don't. This is a cultural problem experienced mostly in countries similar to ours in terms of culture, i.e. the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia, NZ, northern European countries. Rates of women studying STEM subjects and going into STEM careers follow different patterns in Asia, the Middle East and elsewhere - including countries which suffer from all sorts of misogyny.

I don't mind if women actively reject STEM careers as an informed decision - far too often, it's not only ill-informed, it's not even on the radar of many girls in UK schools. They're unaware of the vast range of careers available in these fields. That's a far bigger reason why many don't end up in STEM careers than ideas about our biology.

EBearhug

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18712468

vimeo.com/19707588

They talk about the study around 14:30.

Using data from over 200,000 participants from 53 nations, I examined the cross-cultural consistency of sex differences for four traits: extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and male-versus-female-typical occupational preferences. Across nations, men and women differed significantly on all four traits (mean ds = -.15, -.56, -.41, and 1.40, respectively, with negative values indicating women scoring higher). Only sex predicted means for all four traits, and sex predicted trait means much more strongly than did gender equality or the interaction between sex and gender equality. These results suggest that biological factors may contribute to sex differences in personality and that culture plays a negligible to small role in moderating sex differences in personality.

We talked about this earlier in the thread : women go for degrees that can land them a good job because in developing countries soft, female dominated degrees pay very little and welfare state is almost nonexistent. You can't be serious in saying that girls don't know they can be engineers or physicists in Sweden, they are brainwashed with gender neutral propaganda from the day they are born. And yet the social ''scientists'' and ''engineers'' have completely failed in achieving their neo-marxist utopia.

Jordan Peterson made a good point about why biology is so scary to left wing intellectuals : it can't be fixed. It's much easier to bury your head in the sand and try to tweek society in order to achieve equity, but what do you do if the straight, white man isn't to blame for 100% of inequality? Not only it is tougher to fix but the tweeking would have to involve extremely drastic measures. I lived in communism for the first part of my life and I know exactly what they do to the most productive members of society, right of the bat.

Durham professor Anne Campbell makes another good point in the video I linked above. How can male and female have so many evolutionary differences like height, muscle mass, fat %, bone structure, ligaments, tendons, hormones etc etc yet the brain, the most important organ, has remained completely unaffected through thousands of generations, not to mention pre-human times?

The wiki page on sex differences is a decent place to start:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_physiology#Respiratory_system

“neo-marxist utopia”- LOL