yet again the flakes, bumms, looser and lazy ones are beeing rewarded !

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p><em> doesn't mean that the study did not control for that.</em></p>

<p>Yes, it does. The lack of a coefficient for it indicates they did not control for it. The control is similar to IEEE studies for IT pay. Coming out of college, there is no pay gap. By 10 years out of college, there is. Poorly run studies wonder why. A well run study like the one IEEE did in early 90s pinned the gap to an average time out of job in excess of a year. The gap was a mere 9% which in the core earner and wage growth years following college is marginally over one to two years worth of wages. Unfortunately, the study is not on line that I've been able to find.</p>

<p> </p>
 
I am raising three girls/women to be sucessful with no excuses. They know that every loser has an excuse and excuses will do them no good. They are being raised to be responsible for their own lives, their own situations, and to overcome any obstacles which appear to be in their way. They are being raised knowing that if they blame others for their circumstance, they give power over their lives to whomever they blame. They are being raised to know that everyone has obstacles and the difference betweeen sucess and failure is what one does with one's obstacles. They will use their female gender and their Hispanic ancestry to their advantage and anyone who trys to get in their way for those reasons will get run over.
 
<p><em>They indirectly do this through control for within job-cell/within establishment.</em> </p>

<p>Job cell does not control for years worked. When you read the paper, they make no mention of controlling for time electively spent out of the workplace.</p>
 
<p>lawyerliz,</p>

<p>Your concerns regarding women entering a profession and driving down salaries is also covered in <em>Why Men Earn More</em>:</p>

<p><strong>Chapter 13.


Two Nagging Questions... (p. 209)


• When Women Enter Men’s Occupations, Doesn’t The Pay Go Down? (p. 209)</strong></p>

<p><a href="http://www.warrenfarrell.net/TheBook/index.html">http://www.warrenfarrell.net/TheBook/index.html</a></p>

<p>Further, I disagree with the notion that society will instantly revert back to the 1950's if woman "give up the fight". Anyone consider what society will be like when the pendulum swings too far the other way? It is difficult to believe the momentum will stop perfectly on the sweet spot and it will be a sad sight to see the men who have to live in a society that over-protects women and under-protects men.</p>
 
<p>When performance and merit increases are tied to job performance, not being there to perform your job will have a negative impact on your earnings over time. The logic in that it undeniable. The last time I checked, women were still the only sex capable of actually giving birth, and when they do, they frequently take time off prior to birth and for several weeks afterwards. While their job is safe while they are gone, the absence still has an impact as there is still a gap in their productivity. Extrapolate that over time and population, and there is going to be a wage gap. </p>

<p>In addition to that, there are other basic differences between the sexes that will contribute to a pay gap that has nothing to do with discrimination in hiring, promotion, or pay. Women are not as blindly agressive as men are, generally speaking, nor are men as concerned with social rejection, the opinion of co-workers, or personal failure relative to the majority of women. Those differences exist regardless of work experience, education, social settings, or upbringing. Those same differences will lead a man to ask for a raise, a position, or to take professional risks that women will shy away from in favor of staying with what is safe, secure, and stable. I realize this sounds sexist, but men and women are not emotionally identical sexes. When placed in situations where risk taking is rewarded when met with success, conflict gets results, and ruthlessness is an attribute... men tend to thrive. </p>

<p>There are of course exceptions and circumstances. But this explanation came from my wife, who is currently working her way up the corporate ladder in a male-dominated field. I'm going to consider her opinion and experience more valid than that of a study that starts with the premise of discrimination and then proves it with statistics.</p>
 
This is a little off beat, hopefully I don't sound like a biggot or piggest, however I bet their are quite a few men who would not mind if their women made more than them and us "men" could undertake more of a homemaker role.



Sincerely,

Trying to bring humor to the discussion
 
<p>We're getting there mino. Baby steps....but getting to parity I believe. </p>

<p> Nude, I agree with most of what you typed.</p>

<p>Awgee, LOVE that you are raising your daughters like this ! Kudos, it will serve them well.</p>
 
Also, don't forget....that many times, when a woman is aggressive in the workplace in order to obtain a higher position/status, she may be considered a b*tch and sometimes ostracized by the group. Not going with the "norm" has ramifications. I've been there and paid the price for my climb.
 
Isn't that what is happening to Hillary right now? Any behavior that is unacceptable from her (as being bitchy) is acceptable by a man (as being tough).
 
<p>Nude,</p>

<p>Many will agree with the notion of "men and women are not emotionally identical sexes" and has been recognized. There, too, are books out there to help the less aggressive amongst us to "ask for a raise, a position, or take professional risks..." In fact, we purchased such a book to help my wife advance in her career:</p>

<p>Nice Girls Don't Get The Corner Office: 101 Unconscious Mistakes Women Make That Sabotage Their Careers</p>

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Nice-Girls-Dont-Corner-Office/dp/0446531324">http://www.amazon.com/Nice-Girls-Dont-Corner-Office/dp/0446531324</a></p>

<p>If we as a society do not promote the right behaviors, then what are our other options? Should we really be teaching the more professionally aggressive people to tone it down? Probably not.</p>
 
<p>How can we as human beings achieve true love and equality among the sexes with the constant barrage of male-bashing or "women are always victims" tones? A good start would be to eliminate chivalry, eliminate feminism, and eliminate male heroism.</p>

<p></p>
 
<p>Cue "Rosie The Riveter"... </p>

<p>We can do most things men do.....WW II was a fine example of that.</p>

<p><img align="top" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.rosietheriveter.org/home/weldersa.jpg" />


<em><strong>"Richmond Welders" </strong></em> </p>
 
<p>green. Not many jobs out there require more physical strength than I (and many) women have. We may not be able to be *as* proficient, but it will get done. (Football player, perhaps, might be one that we wouldn't do well in). Steroids would not be necessary as I do not want to become a man. :P</p>

<p>It's common sense that's most important, having a good head on your shoulders and a fairness about you. Aggressive when necessary while trying to not cross that imaginary b*tch border. (Not easy in my profession, some men just do not want to follow a woman's orders....)</p>
 
<p>I have a rather high girlish voice.</p>

<p>When I am feeling especially confident in a position, it has happened that the man on the other end of the phone, who has never seen me, has said sharply, "Yes, sir!!"</p>

<p>This causes me to giggle helplessly for a while, usually.</p>

<p>This has NEVER happened with a woman.</p>

<p>Also, men have been known to have been beaten by their wives. But not as often as the usual case.</p>

<p>Well this thread has gone to hell.</p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top