September 1, 2010, - 12:57 pm

That’s Equality?: Women Now Earn MORE Than Men Across US

By Debbie Schlussel

When I was a kid in the ’70s and ’8os, and my late father used to take me to pro-Israel events, he had this friend who would always show up.  The friend, very good on Mid-East issues, was lost on every other political topic.  He always wore a pin that said “68 Cents,” or some other such number.  If you asked him what the pin meant, he’d tell you he’s a member of the National Organization for Women (NOW), and that this was the number that women in the workforce made for every dollar men earned.  My dad and I would privately laugh to ourselves, not only because wearing the pin was absurd and wimpy, but because we knew this was baloney.  In fact, for the last several decades, women who didn’t have children and stayed in the workforce for the same amount of time as men, earned similar wages for similar jobs.

womenatwork.jpgnomen.jpg

Now, though, my Dad’s friend–who I believe is still alive–needs to wear a pin that reads “8% more.”  That’s because new figures show discrimination against men in the workforce, with single women earning 8% more than their male peers in metropolitan areas around the U.S.  That was the case for figures in 2008, and I’d bet that 2009 figures are even more lopsided.  Sounds like discrimination to me.  Men don’t leave the workforce to have kids (at least men who don’t like going to Liza Minelli concerts or wearing the skirt in the family).  So, there is no excuse to account for the increase, other than vagina-based affirmative action.

It’s clearly anti-male discrimination and sexism. And it was predictable since, as I’ve repeatedly noted on this site, colleges and grad school student bodies are now overwhelmingly female. And, as I also reported on this site, men are more likely to be affected by the recession, since they are in industries and professions in which job loss is far greater in this bad economy. And then there’s the fact that women get the majority of spots in hiring and promotions in math, science, and engineering in academia.  That’s not even mentioning that American men are more likely to get serious illnesses and to be without healthcare coverage.  The escalating disparity between women’s and men’s salaries in favor of the women is the logical end-result from these factors.

So, where are NOW and all the employment discrimination trial lawyers and their shrill cries?  Nowhere to be found.  Ditto for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which still presses charges for mostly female complainants in alleged gender-based discrimination cases.  But here are the facts:

The earning power of young single women has surpassed that of their male peers in metropolitan areas around the U.S., a shift that is being driven by the growing ranks of women who attend college and move on to high-earning jobs.

In 2008, single, childless women between ages 22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts in most U.S. cities, with incomes that were 8% greater on average, according to an analysis of Census Bureau data released Wednesday by Reach Advisors, a consumer-research firm in Slingerlands, N.Y.

The trend was first identified several years ago in the country’s biggest cities, but has broadened out to smaller locales and across more industries. Beyond major cities such as San Francisco and New York, the income imbalance is pronounced in blue-collar hubs and the fast-growing metro areas that have large immigrant populations.

The greatest disparity is in Atlanta, where young, childless women were paid 121% the level of their male counterparts, according to Reach Advisors.

These women have gotten a leg up for several reasons. They are more likely than men to attend college, raising their earning potential.

Between 2006 and 2008, 32.7% of women between 25 and 34 had a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared with 25.8% of men, according to the Census.

And men have been disproportionately hit by heavy job losses in blue-collar industries.

“I expect the trend to continue,” said Andrew Beveridge, a professor at Queens College at the City University of New York, who has studied the phenomenon.

This is all very disturbing because we are quickly becoming a matriarchal society. And, despite the BS of airheads like Sarah Palin who made her hubby play Mr. Mom while she selfishly pursued fame, societies run by “Mama Grizzlies” always die. Do you think knocked-up, fame-obsessed chicks like Palin’s baby mama daughter are gonna be the ones to fight off terrorism or disaster? Only if you’re a moron.  The Alpha Female model might work for effeminate men like Todd Palin and Jesse Malkin, who dropped off their man cards and testicles at the pawn shop long ago.  But for the rest of America .  .  .

Good luck with that.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

49 Responses

You must also take into consideration govt. incentives to have a diverse employee base necessary to receive govt. contract jobs. I lost a job opportunity in Chicago based on this govt. sponsored race discrimination.

Piker on September 1, 2010 at 1:17 pm

I think for jobs, the salary for whatever position should be the same regardless of gender and race.

Matthew on September 1, 2010 at 1:42 pm

Deb, in all due respect, you do not even know the half of it, or at least you have not written about the worst offender…THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Incompetent women are put in positions of power, GS-15s, with nothing more than a high school diploma or at best a degree in general studies, while men with biochemistry degrees, law degrees, mbas, and combinations thereof, languish in lower level positions. Make no mistake, they are doing the work of the women above them, but they will never be promoted.

Jgrant on September 1, 2010 at 1:48 pm

I wish all males, particularly white males, would stop serving in the US military, and stop giving time and money to charity. Let society know what happens without men. Women are not as charitable as men. See the charities close up. See the military run of personnel quickly.

– Jon

Jgrant on September 1, 2010 at 1:55 pm

JGrant is right that the worst offender is the Federal Government, and, by extension, all government bureaucracies, state, local and national, around the country.

Workforces for teachers and bureaucrats in general are more female than male, and layoffs and firings are much fewer than in private industry, with higher payraises to please BO’s voting base.

And, of course it is true that affirmative action causes incompetent women to rise to or above their level of incompetence both in government, and, as has been noted, with government contractors. Faux-conservatives are attracted to ideas of promotion within government based on ‘merit’, and they are too dumb, (are being paid not) to realize that in a PC environment, promotion based on ‘merit’ means affirmative action. It’s been years since I’ve heard a Republican of any sigificance criticize affirmative action.

Little Al on September 1, 2010 at 2:03 pm

Jgrant – BHO is already doing just what you wrote – he wants to put women on subs and in combat related positions. Those are just two quick examples; there are many, many others.

Jarhead on September 1, 2010 at 2:04 pm

“The Alpha Female model might work for effeminate men like Todd Palin and Jesse Malkin, who dropped off their man cards and testicles at the pawn shop long ago.” LMAO,EPIC LINE!!

CaliforniaScreaming on September 1, 2010 at 2:14 pm

The Alpha Male has morphed into the Emo Male.

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/painkiller/Emos.png

CaliforniaScreaming on September 1, 2010 at 2:20 pm

Feminism, “women’s lib”, women’s rights, etc. was never about equality or fairness. That’s why it is still ok to descriminate against a man based on sex, but not against a woman.

RT on September 1, 2010 at 2:33 pm

More of the liberals acid test results, the extra maternal subjugation.

Mommy, may I???? No son, when you grow up we’ll talk about it now get back to your school work so you can help with the bills.

Mommy….you didn’t like that dirty little girl I was playing with so to make you proud I started dating boys. Can you give me another enema, please mommy?

A pen on September 1, 2010 at 3:09 pm

Are we comparing apples to oranges here? The study specifies SINGLE, CHILDLESS women, but does it say the same about the men? Or is it just men, in general?

What about comparing the married men, with 2.5 kids to the married women with 2.5 kids? Yes, most women in that situation will be paid less, because most of them have taken some time off work to deal with the kids. And mostly, when a child is sick and needs a parent at home, it’s the mother who uses up her own sick leave to do so. Then, when SHE gets sick, with no sick leave left, it’s a ding on her record.

I think you’ll find that parents don’t make as much as childless people, regardless of gender.

To be fair, when measuring across gender lines, we should compare length of service, or length of time actively in the work force. If a woman with 10 years active in the work force (maybe 11 working, but with time off for kids) makes more than a man with 10 years active in the work force (maybe 11, but with time off for convalescence after a work-related injury), then there is something wrong. But if they make the same, based on length of service, then it is equitable.

Will someone please do such a study?

Michelle on September 1, 2010 at 3:33 pm

Actually, I think the main problem is that the mothers in the work force are still being the Mommy, while fathers in the work force are not. If a woman has to use all her leave time to care for a child, thus hindering her career, while her husband does not, then that’s not a societal issue, but an issue in their marriage. Mind you, it could still be perfectly equitable, if he picks up the slack in other areas. I’m all for the fair distribution of labor, based on who is best at the job to be done. If the mother is the best sickroom nurse, then she SHOULD be the one to stay home, and they’ll just have to accept that her career will suffer for it. Meanwhile, when the car breaks down, HE is the one to deal with that, while she goes to work.

Or the old SAHM thing works, too. But that’s up to the individual couples, and isn’t something society needs to adjudicate.

All I’m saying is, let’s do a study to compare apples to apples, and leave the oranges out of it. Payscales for similar jobs, with similar time served, and even in similar locations – now THAT is valuable data. Even comparing the pay of a waiter in Ches Frou Frou, San Fransisco to that of a waiter in Flo’s Diner, Podunkville, is going to be useless data.

And that’s why you have people saying “Women make less money!” and at the same time, “Women make more money!” It’s all in how you ask the question, and how you twist the answers.

Michelle on September 1, 2010 at 3:42 pm

The article said:
These women have gotten a leg up for several reasons. They are more likely than men to attend college, raising their earning potential.

Between 2006 and 2008, 32.7% of women between 25 and 34 had a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared with 25.8% of men, according to the Census.

And men have been disproportionately hit by heavy job losses in blue-collar industries.

Michelle here:
Apples and oranges again. They’re comparing white collar and blue collar work. Yes, the pay will be different.

Let’s compare Rosie and Rob, the riviters, and Bob and Barbara, the office drones, but not Rosie and Bob or Rob and Barbara.

Michelle on September 1, 2010 at 3:45 pm

Oh G-d, women with children use the children as a weapon to get promoted. “If you do not promote me, I will claim it is because I have children.”

As for the armed forces, let the women do the fighting, and give to the charities. Men, particularly white men, have been taken for granted for too long! And if you are a white male over 50, forget it. You are really screwed.

I do speak ebonics, so maybe that job at the DEA is still open.

Jgrant on September 1, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    Ha ha! Yeah people are just so unappreciative of the white man anymore. You’re right, just let all the women fight on the front lines and all of us white men will sit back and watch. Go ahead and be cops and run the country if all I care. They will soon be begging for us to protect them when every other country has enslaved them.

    Reason why women shouldn’t be police officers…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biVEVwzcvHc&has_verified=1

    Dennis on September 9, 2010 at 8:07 pm

Of course, when ‘CaliforniaScreaming’ speaks of the “Emo Male,” he’s not referring to the bizarro comic Emo Phillips who was popular in the ’80′s.

ConcernedPatriot on September 1, 2010 at 4:09 pm

Women with children, in the workforce, annoy single childless co-workers, too. “Hey, how come she gets to take the afternoon off to see little Susie’s dance recital? Didn’t she just take off last week to take Billy to the dentist? I’m tired of picking up her slack.”

Yeah, the complaints are everywhere. But when a father takes the afternoon off to see Susie’s dance recital – “Isn’t it wonderful? What a supportive father he’s being.”

Let’s face it – there will always be someone complaining, and something to complain about. It’s human nature, and the nature of subjective data.

Michelle on September 1, 2010 at 5:02 pm

I think the ultimate fraud I’ve seen played out is the phony Feminism schtick. I may be wrong, but in the 80′s I believe feminism (in it’s real sense) reached it’s apogee because since then, the whole fraud movement had regressed in a real disgusting way.

I used to think women really wanted equality. They wanted more than equality, which is becoming the monster they supposedly hated. I used to think that once women were more equal, things like porn and using sex would subside. They are more part of the main-stream culture than ever before. Italian skank Lady Gaga just stole from skank Madonna (and other avant garde artists) and turned it up to 11. The culture loves it like it’s a kick in the pants. In the 80′s they told you women hated porn…in the 90′s woman became CEO’s of porn companies. Who’s zooming who?

Thou’ hardly Conservative, I highly recommend a book lost in the ether called “Female Chauvinist Pigs”. It hardly got the press it deserved, but it was the only book I ever saw that took on the phony feminist movement (lesbians included)…and how that BS devolved into females becoming the disgusting swine they supposedly hated in to see men be. That’s empowerment?

Skunky on September 1, 2010 at 5:04 pm

    Bye, MK750. We won’t miss you.

    You have exposed your lack of brains long ago. I did not call Skank Madonna an “Italian slut” because the hag did not refer to herself as an Italian slut…as Italian Slut Lady Gaga did in the September issue of Vanity Fair. You’re not the PC police even though you wanna be.

    You also exposed your lack of any backbone. Oh, you’re leaving because DS posted an issue that is close to your bones? Get lost. This site is all about taking on all bad issues and exposing them…sacred cows or not. The truth matters here. There has been plenty of exposure of things here that we may not be comfortable with, but the adults take it if it is the truth and don’t shoot the messenger. You’re a tiresome crybaby scold.

    How can we miss you if you never leave?

    S: I’ve deleted MK750′s absurd, abusive, lying comment. Her crazy old lady, self-hating Jewess in Israel act got old fast. Thanks. DS

    Skunky on September 2, 2010 at 11:51 am

Great article! Women are getting all the degrees so naturally they are going to earn more than men just as Andrew Beveridge stated.
There is am anti-feminist blog that had a post saying that more women than men go to college because of financial and education discrimination against men.

http://sxmodels.blogspot.com/2010/01/decreasing-percentage-of-college.html

Since our society is now controlled by feminist, I think things will get much worse since we only care about half the population in this country.

Jason on September 1, 2010 at 5:08 pm

Ah yes, the new victim: The whiny White male. He either can’t compete on an equal footing or must suppress everyone else.

Norman Blitzer on September 1, 2010 at 5:42 pm

    Blitzer, you are so bitchy, I think you sit down when you have to pee.

    Jgrant on September 1, 2010 at 11:01 pm

Norman Blitzer on September 1, 2010 at 5:42 pm

Creepy, old NB. The bomb thrower. Throwing bombs and running away like a girl…and missing his mark (as always!) by hundreds of feet. LOL.

Skunky on September 1, 2010 at 5:57 pm

Again, it looks like some of us have to work on our reading comprehension.

Debbie said the comparison was between single women and single men for 2008. The data are even more striking because people in their 20s were compared. One can only expect the payrates to diverge more as ages advance, since the differing bases to which raises apply become more pronounced.

The difference for 2008 is likely greater than the Census Bureau reported, since this Government bureaucracy is infested with political correctness.

And ‘counterparts’ means ‘counterparts’.

Michelle seems to be implying that women who are parents should justifiably get a differential because of raising kids. Here we go again.

Don’t base pay on merit; base it on the liberals’ conception of need. From each according to his ability; to each according to her need.

And then there is the deceptive tactic of trying to discredit the data by saying it is incomplete, that more study is needed. I guess that if there was a study of how many terrorist events in the last xxx years were committed by Muslims, someone would say that we had to define terrorism better, we had to define Muslim degree of commitment, whether they were citizens, or some other poppycock to discredit findings that are intuitively obvious, as the pay disparities in Debbie’s post are.

Michelle seems to discuss every possible factor except the factor of political correctness.

Little Al on September 1, 2010 at 6:14 pm

As I have said countless times before:
The wage gap between men and women is a complete lie.

If you really could get the exact same work from women that you get from men for 68 cents on the dollar, every company in America would have fired all there men and hired all women.
If it really was possible to get exact same product for cheaper you would buy the cheaper product.

This new study just throws another wrench into the whole debate.
Maybe it will make liberals think before they speak, sorry I was just dreaming for a minute there.

smg45acp on September 1, 2010 at 8:33 pm

It seems like the article is saying not that women are getting payed more for the same work as men, but rather that a Single Childless female, is more likely to be making more than a Single Childless male.

So basically, you are taking a statistic, and comparing it to an unrelated one.

Max Power on September 1, 2010 at 8:44 pm

America in decline.

Look at this…..

http://www.asylum.com/2010/08/27/candobetter-women-release-sex-tape-for-career-grades/

Skunky on September 1, 2010 at 8:55 pm

This is gist of the study (copied & pasted):

An analysis of census data by consumer research firm Reach Advisors found that women between the ages of 22 and 30, without children, had bigger paychecks in 2008 than their male peers in 47 of the 50 largest U.S. cities. Their wages were 8 percent higher, on average, but varied considerably from one city to the next.

For women in every other demographic group, the wage gap still tilts decisively toward men

———————–

If it’s put plainly, what it the issue?

Lee in IL on September 1, 2010 at 10:46 pm

And of course the comparison between blue-collar men and white-collar women is apt. As a generalization, men are in occupations that are being hit hard, and women are in occupations that are not. Within-occupation comparisons are helpful, but the main disparity is between differing occupations.

Little Al on September 1, 2010 at 11:17 pm

Like the take on that, DS… I heard Clint Eastwood say something very recently that a secure man respects women and (he did not stop there as feminists might) that secure women respect men.

MH on September 2, 2010 at 3:52 am

When women make up half the armed forces, and are subject to Selective service, then we can talk about “Equality” for women. Until then, the concept of a female Commander in Chief of the armed forces is inherently hypocritical. Until then, the “Feminist” movement was about convenience for females and nothing to do with the responsiblity that comes with that freedom.

Obama ( The First female President) has now lost more soldiers in Afghanistan than Bush did. Think about that. Bush lost 630 soldiers in 86 months. Obama has lost 632 in 19 months. Our soldiers are experiencing shortages of ammo, food and blankets. The contempt for the white male dominated conservative armed forces is only going to get worse.

Barry on September 2, 2010 at 9:41 am

All of this diversity stuff is nothing but discrimination that hurts all of us by having incompetent people doing work they are not qualified for. Whatever happened to judging a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin? Clearly all white males are being discriminated against especially in the workplace.

crank on September 2, 2010 at 1:53 pm

So…it’s “baloney” when statistics show that women earn less than men on the dollar, but when statistics show the reverse they’re automatically right? And…it’s “wimpy” when a man stands up for discrimination against women, but when a woman (in this case Debbie) stands up for discrimination against men it’s totally awesome and righteous?

Pot…have you, by any chance, remembered to call the kettle and let him know he’s black?

energy2 on September 2, 2010 at 7:43 pm

Wow I guess all the feminist complaining paid off eh? Turns out women get to choose what equal rights they want isn’t it wonderful? Women want to make as much as men holding the sign at a construction site while the man is down in the hole breaking his back or using a jackhammer sweating his ass off. It’s lovely isn’t it? When men fail it’s because they are just a loser. If they succeed it’s because they had an unfair advantage. If women succeed it’s because they worked hard and did it all by themselves. On the other hand if they fail it’s because of sexism. This whole study is a crock of shit. Women have been making as much as men for years. They just haven’t held high ranking positions. Maybe they just don’t have the “balls”. Anyway, my mother and I worked at the same place and I asked her how much she made? It’s crazy! Guess what I made the same amount! Isn’t that unreal?! women just stop bitching, there are some jobs you can’t do, just deal with it.

Dennis on September 9, 2010 at 7:52 pm

Women make more than men now. Do you want to know why? Women are considered a minority group just like the blacks and all of the rest. They get government grants for college, and government grants for businesses. Government grants have been issued to fix this problem. They can afford to earn a degree because the government was so generous to help them out. Affirmative action is also on your side too. Employers are afraid of lawsuits so they hire you. So basically women you are where you are because of men whatever way you look at it. You are getting the grants because the men in power said so. Women love to pick and choose their equal rights. They want to make as much as men holding a stop/slow sign on a construction site while the man breaks his back doing hard labor. It’s a fucking joke.

Dennis on September 10, 2010 at 10:03 pm

Debbie, do you earn more than your husband or boyfriend?

I have read that more women graduate college than men. However, it doesn’t state the type of degree.

I doubt that a woman with a Ph.D is married to a man with an associates degree.

Let’s face it; women are designed to want a provider. The majority will not wind-up with someone who earns less then they do.

Look around; you will see that I speak the truth.

Mark on September 28, 2010 at 3:02 pm

“Women are designed to want a provider”
Really, Mark? You don’t think that’s an outlook that society pushes on them and people like you perpetuate?
I’m in undergrad engineering right now and you’re right, I probably wouldn’t want to marry someone with an associates or just a h.s. diploma. Not because he can’t provide for me, starting salary in my field is around $60k, but because I don’t want to marry an idiot I can’t talk to. And you sure as hell can’t talk to someone with just a h.s. diploma about particle physics.

And would you even be ok with having your wife earn more than you? Because I know a lot of men that wouldn’t be.

There’s been a large jump in the number of women in our colleges. In fact, there’s more women in them then men now. You don’t think that a larger percentage of women being educated is causing this?

cfrass on October 6, 2010 at 4:00 pm

Not only will you not marry someone with just a high-school diploma, you won’t marry a man who has less of an education and earns less than you.

Of course I would be OK with a woman who earns more, but generally these women avoid me like the plague.

I do think a larger number or educated women is causing these issues. They want a man who earns more and has an equal or advanced education, but that demographic of men is shrinking.

Women claim they do not “marry down” because they would have nothing to talk about. LOL!!! We are talking and I do not have a degree in engineering. How is that possible?

Quit using lame excuses to justify marrying a man who earns more. You are too transparent.

Mark on November 16, 2010 at 5:54 pm

Can you talk to someone with a Ph.D. in theology about particle physics? Probably not.

You know damn well that couples don’t spend time discussing things of that nature. You just use that as an excuse to marry a wealthy man.

We (men) can see your true colors.

Mark on November 16, 2010 at 5:57 pm

Women are more likely to marry up in every country.

Do you think that perhaps this has something to do with nature?

In almost every aspect of nature, males are generally dominant.

Ask any woman over 70 if she was forced into marriage and the kitchen. You might be surprised.

I am sick of 20 and 30 something feminists who put words into the mouths of women who actually lived in the 40′s and 50′s.

Mark on November 16, 2010 at 6:03 pm

“Men don’t leave the workforce to have kids (at least men who don’t like going to Liza Minelli concerts or wearing the skirt in the family). So, there is no excuse to account for the increase, other than vagina-based affirmative action.”

Can this author be more vulgar and ridiculous in her statements? I suppose all men who “have no balls” and choose to stay home with there children are essentially homosexual. Just as women who LEFT the homemaker position in the 1950′s to current have been criticized and called bad parents, then men “step up to the plate” and fufill that role and they are “wearing the skirt in the family”.

Not to mention the idiotic rant about Sarah Palin, whom I hate by the way. . “Do you think knocked-up, fame-obsessed chicks like Palin’s baby mama daughter are gonna be the ones to fight off terrorism or disaster?” For some reason, I don’t recall Bristow Palin running for office? What does Sarah Palin’s teenage daughter have anything to do with politics. Also, this author should LOVE Bristow and Sarah Palin both, as they’ve both “stayed in their place” in the home. Palin actually abandoned her entire state to be with her family. What a trooper! Finally, her husband Todd can have his testicles back!

This mornic rant by Debbie Schlussel is by no means literature and for all of the uneducated low lifes in support of her radical anti-feminist views, look to your wives, your mothers, your daughters. Look to all that women do for this country, as well as what men do. Both males and females make society unique. Celebrate that. And Ms. Schlussel, please ask yourself why you are so angry with women? And get back to doing those dishes, after all you’ve really abandonded your role as a woman by attending college. Plus, you’ve added to those terrible statistics of female college graduates exceeding males. Tisk tisk.

Adrea on November 21, 2010 at 6:01 pm

I agree with Mark.

Men are not intimidated by women who earn more money. Women just avoid men who earn less money and justify this by claiming that men are intimidated by women who earn more money.

Yarrie on November 24, 2010 at 9:25 am

What’s interesting about this trend is how miserable these women are now. Now that the men don’t have to bust their asses so much and the women have become largely terrible material for wives and mothers, men can just stay-in to play video games, go out to hike mountains, or just chill with some guy buddies with good whiskey and cigars.

We don’t really need women anymore. Maybe just for occasional sex, but I suppose escorts can do.

At the end of the day, if men in the US really wanted a good woman to marry, he can always go to a foreign country which still has actual women.

I’d say life isn’t so bad for us men. Let the women toil away at the office! They got their right to slave away, so let them enjoy it!

Boheme Chinois on December 21, 2011 at 12:44 pm

This is a great report, completed properly. I assume I’d personally produce the weblog way too.

Carola Mackesy on May 28, 2012 at 7:51 am

Hello, i think that i saw you visited my website thus i
came to go back the favor?.I am attempting to in finding issues to enhance my site!I assume its good enough to use a few of
your concepts!!

best dragon story cheats on March 30, 2014 at 12:47 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field