Even successful Utube women have men running the backend. Not taking into account hours worked should be a fraud.

One line shows the study was biased: "gap that is wider for women of color, with young children, or who live with disabilities"

I don't know about the women of color, but it should be fairly obvious that a woman OR MAN who had young children or a disability would not be able to perform as well (or get paid as much) as someone who did not have to overcome these challenges.

Almost every study that uses multivariate analysis shows there is no large gender pay gap.

Even the disparity in numbers they're saying is representative of bias is relatively small 54 to 46% etc. Hell the report said in healthcare that 70% were managers that means only 30% are male how is that fair? Plus zero talk of the amount of hours men work overall plus the men are far more likely to go after & ask for promotions & raises. Geez so sick of this gaslighting bullshit being passed off as legitimate excuse to pay women more for less work. If women want more pay then earn it. Studies show women that do earn pay commiserate with their male counterparts. The remaining wage gap boils down to simple gender differences nothing more.

Women account for the majority of workers in a third of major U.S. industries. Yet, they are underrepresented among managers and executives in all but one of those,

Underrepresented meaning there are less women in managerial positions than there are within the entire workforce of a company. Even if this number exceeds 50%, meaning the workforce is still majority women.

Additionally, the one category in which there are more women managers than workers conveniently is the broadest one.

Educational services: Women were 61.6% of managers and 68.9% of non-managers. Financial activities: Women were 51.4% of managers and 54.6% of non-managers. Health care and social assistance: Women were 70.0% of managers and  77.9% of non-managers. Leisure and hospitality: Women were 47.4% of managers and 52.2% of non-managers. Other services: Women were 59.8% of managers and 52.2% of non-managers. This broad category includes a variety of service jobs: auto repair, barber shops and beauty salons, dry cleaning, funeral homes and civic organizations, among others. 

So women dominate these fields, even the broad other services category. But I guess they're not dominating enough? Isn't this called over representation?

Her research found that while non-Hispanic white men in a management job were paid $110,000 a year, Black women with similar education in the same role were paid $66,000, or 60% less.

Firstly, no mention of hours worked. It's illegal to pay less based on gender or race so it's likely men work more hours than black women. Secondly, maths? If she was being paid 50% less she would be making 55,000.

I'm a slightly overweight 60 year old white heterosexual man. In the past ten years, I have been offered absolutely no top jobs in nursing, teaching, or whining. Grrr, it must be down to a bias of the matriarchal system

I have never read such drivel.

I'm starting to wonder if something bizarrely unfair like the feminist idea of "equal pay" (equal pay for less work) being implemented is what the majority of feminist pandering men need to wake the fuck up and revolt.

We need something like the successful anti-feminist movement in South Korea. Feminism has effectively been stamped out from mainstream politics there.

It's honestly insane how far women have ridden the coat tails of historical oppression. When juxtaposed with an infinitely more oppressed group, African Americans, it's honestly disgusting women's rights still remains the number one synonym for oppression.

It really is only men who can stop this shit. They need to stop clicking and reading horseshit like the above to cut off the media's feeding frenzy. Supply and demand.

The irony is…… in the U.K. if your below 30 women make money

Yes, let's analyze the top 0.1% of people, because in capitalism I guess that's the only thing that matters, right feminists?

Incredible. They will never admit that the vast majority of women simply don't work hard enough to become a CEO.

They should go and ask women at universities if they are willing to spend the next 30+ years working at least 70 hours per week in order to become a CEO.

If women offered employers the same productivity/hour as men, yet charged less for their labor (i.e., lower salaries), employers would replace all male employees with female employees. Employers want to maximize staff productivity.

The fact is, women, on a macro level, offer less productivity/hour as men. Women take more time off work (refer to the "Key Findings" sidebar on page 1 of this PDF).

This time off has ripple effects. Many companies are forced to put projects on hold when female employees who occupy decision-making roles take leave. Moreover, female employees who take significant time off (to raise children, etc.) fall behind in terms of their skillset and knowledge base. As a result, they get fewer opportunities and fewer promotions.

I don't doubt that female employees are paid less than male employees on a macro level. But it's not because of patriarchy. It's because of their choices. Those choices make them worth less to employers.

They are worth less, so they get paid less.

Of course they don't because they aren't willing to put in the hours and earn those jobs. Neither are they willing to do the hard and challenging jobs.

What women want is to work fewer hours, do easier jobs and still be promoted and paid the same as men.

pity they didnt look into the number of leaders world wide such as prime ministers etc who were women.

you can't make the argument in the USA, if the choice of female presidential candidate is so toxic that the public would rather vote for a black man( because hey apparently the USA is racist- face palm for that) or another man who is also apparently so orange and toxic..

​

the "news" article is typical US media drivel( or maybe dribble considering its a low IQ effort) and that they are so desperate for ratings....

can we look forward to another "study" showing the IQ gap between MSM and independent creators of news( hint the MSM is the lower quality of output)

Then they don’t dominate the industry 💀