Perhaps this is why men earn more than women

Perhaps men earn more than women because they work harder.

How many women are expected to be the financial provider for their husbands? Not very many.
Does a women ever have to worry that her husband might leave her because she does not work hard enough and earn enough money? Never.

What is one of the first questions a woman asks on a date? "So, what do you do for work?"
When women are alone, they often talk about the financial situations of their husbands or boyfriends. I have actually seen this. How many men talk about their wives/girlfriends like this?

Why should it be so surprising that men are earning more than women?
Men are under much more pressure to earn money than women. Women simply expect much more from their husbands than men expect from wives.

It is not women that think women should be paid the same as men; It is feminists!
Feminists just have difficulty understanding that most other women hold expectations that their man financially provide for the family.

When a man is under intense pressure to earn more money and provide for the rest of his family, he is going to be much more willing to relocate to a new job in another area, more willing to take a job that has a longer commute time, and he is going to work harder at his job to try to get an advancement. Not to mention that men are willing to work in more boring or less pleasant jobs to earn more money. How many women would be willing to spend six months out on an oil platform in the middle of the North Sea?

Feminists complain that men are earning more than women. But these men are giving this money to their wives! The mormons have a saying: "The man earns the money and the woman spends it." How does it matter if men are earning more money than women? Women are still the ones spending this money!

Until society places such a burden of expectations on women, it seems unfair for women to expect to earn as much as men.

The gender quotas that have been used are mostly only concentrating job opportunity into just a handful of the career women that really are working as hard as men. Just as has been the experience in other forms of "affirmative action" in various other countries, quotas can actually increase inequality. The benefits from the quotas go mostly to an "upper crust" of the discriminated gender/ethnicity. There is no reason to take job opportunity away from men to give to childless career women that are already earning as much as men, just because most of the other women are not focusing on their careers as much as men.

In Norway, when the law suddenly required that 40 percent of a company's board of directors be women, there were not enough qualified women available, so the small number of qualified women suddenly found themselves with positions on multiple boards, earning extremely high incomes, even though they could not possible be fully fullfilling their responsibilities on so many of these boards.

from "The Economist":

I support helping women, helping them achieve financial independance, and making it easier for them to start families. But gender quotas are NOT the solution.

 

In Norway for example, a single business woman, Mimi Berdal, sat on the board of 40 different companies at the same time! There were not enough qualified women available to comply with the law. So the few woman that did have experience were suddenly in huge demand. Obviously this did not do much to help all the other women.

South Africa had the same experiences when they used racial quotas to require that 50 percent of every publicly-traded corporation be owned by Blacks. There were only a small handful of Blacks that had the money to buy the corporate stock, and a select few suddenly became extremely wealthy, again doing virtually nothing to help all the other Blacks. This is how Patrice Motsepe became South Africa's wealthiest man.

 

You sick misogynist bastard. How dare you question the tearing down of every social construct of society, regardless of whether it was positive or negative towards the advancement of that society.

 

This is why forced government solutions don't work.

 

Wow … there’s some really suppress issues in this section.

I just want to go on Record; Ladies … I’m not in this Lonely Camp.

 

That’s fine with me …

Not only do I like Women, I like Women who Love Women; it’s a Win Win … Sport … get with the program.

Either way, I don’t disrespect Women … It’s a Values thing for me, not a Conservative Slogan.

 

No. Men earn more than women because women WANT to earn less than men (as a group). And this makes a lot of sense for women, by the way, because they undercut men with this and get more jobs than men. For centuries, starting with the textile industry, women were employed in greater numbers than men, because employers got them cheaper. This is still evident today, when in our current 2009 economic depression, women's unemployment didn't go nearly as far as men's.

 

Well my Wife make more than me ... and I'm fine with that, because she's in Sales and I'm not!

 

Video that interviews Norwegian men and women, to investigate why the different genders prefer to do different types of jobs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70&feature=related

Notice how those in academia completely deny any possible genetic/biological differences and try to ascribe all gender differences to social conditioning. I find it rather amusing how far they try to take the ideology of equality, even to the point of denying the obvious. As if even the possibility of inherent psychological differences between the sexes is threatening to the notion of equality.

 

Sometimes people act so shocked to find out that women don't earn as much as men, overall.

I say, WHY?

they automatically *assume* it is because of gender discrimination.
they refuse to consider such things as men working longer hours and accomplishing more (both true)
they act as if a woman who just gets her law degree and passes the bar should immediately start getting paid as much as F. Lee Bailey LOL

bunch o' liberal saps

 

A lot of men give their earnings to their wife who is in charge of the family finances. Most men are quite simple...Food, Tools, Toys & Sex will keep them happy. (not necessarily in that order)

 

Ladies and gents, let me add to the discussion. Hopefully this hasn't been said before but I'm too hungry to read through the posts:

It generally takes time to get a well paid job, you start at the bottom and work your way up. Women usually give birth and stay home with their children thus halting this process, which mean typically do not. Thus men will have progressed further on this 'income ladder' simply because they haven't taken a break. that's on reason.

Another reason is that men and women are different and tend to favour differned occupations. It just so happens that the jobs most favoured by women are also paid less. There's been some statistic showing that men earn only about 3% more than women in the same occupation and all factors equal. And since we are different I would not be suprised if it turned out that men worked harder for whatever reason. Men are also generally more competitive, which is a useful things in a harsh market. You have to have 'sharp elbows' as we say in sweden.

 

I have an idea!

If you are not on the dole, why don't you make up a petition with the sentence :
"REAL Women do not think women should be paid the same wages as men for the same work!"
and go around to all the women in your workplace, and stores etc. and have them sign it!

Have fun!

 

But women don't do the same (*)(*)(*)(*)ing work. So stop trying to act like Rosie the riveter is out there in the mines shoveling coal. She isn't and a few lesbo outliers don't count.

This whole "Same pay for same work" crap is absolute BS because women don't do the same work!!

 

Women should make the same in intellectual fields, that is why more of them are in college in the US, because they aren't physically capable of doing physical jobs as productively as men can.

However physical jobs are a sign of menial labor, and we should let illegal immigrants do that kind of work, and not promote tradesmen like plumbers, electricians, as a good future for employment any longer to Americans.

 

The Right is SO FREAKING ABSURD!

First they say NO ONE should get paid much for PHYSICAL WORK because ANYONE can do it, but somehow its OK to pay women LESS THAN MEN because they are not out there running a jackhammer even an ILLITERATE ILLEGAL could operate!



You DO realize its not 1941 anymore?

 

Where are women jackhammer operators making less than male jackhammer operators at? Show me.

In what company is a female vice president of aquisitions making less than a male vice president of aquisitions within the same firm? Show me.

The only form of "anti-woman" bias I've ever seen is that mothers who can only put in 60-70 hours of work a week are penalized and don't get to get on the top boards because the male execs can still work 90-100 hours a week regardless of child status. It's called the "mommy track" and it stops a career dead.

But that is to be expected. If a job requires 100 hours a week and all a mother can put in is 60-70. Then she's not going to get the job and salary.

 

You are a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing idiot with that "menial labor" comment. Have YOU ever worked a day in your life sonny?

 

You've commited a argumentation error there thought you'd like to know, and an ad hominem. Wheter he/she has done this or that is completely irrelevant.

 

No,I think it is relevant to ask him/her if they ever worked a day in their life,because from I take offense of the "menial labor" comment. Sounds like to me he/she is a spoiled brat and never had to struggle to put food on the table for your family doing "menial labor" jobs. Those jobs that he speaks of are filled with lots of proud men AND women that do it well. It just pisses me off to hear that those jobs are beneath him.

 

Might be might not, doesn't matter. It's irrelevant to the argument he's making.

 

Well said.

But they never say "same pay for same work", but "equal pay for equal work" -- so it's more subjective and slippery.

 

it's not the work that's beneath anyone, it's the PAY. Many a man or woman would be happy to wallow in warm spit all day, if it paid $1000 per hour, after tax. I'm one of them, at least for the first 200 hours. I want 100 hour weeks. at that rate.

 

Perhaps people should be paid on their ability to do the job.
Perhaps if you have a man and a woman doing the same job with the same qualifications and experience they should be paid the same.

It shouldn't make the slightest difference what the gender of the person is.

but perhaps I am being to logically.

 

Yes they are, or it'll never happen.

Unfortunately, there are still a lot of people who need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.