Skip to main content

A "study" shows there isn't a gender-wage gap. It must be true!

According to a new study released by PayScale, the gender-wage gap is a myth. Also, due to these supposed findings, 97.2% of conservative males got erections.

This PayScale study claims that men and women get paid about the same for the same kind of jobs. According to this study, women earn 98% of what men earn in non-managerial positions and 91% of what men earn in executive positions.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census data has long reported that women earn between 77 and 80% of what men do. With a disparity of approximately 20%, what gives?

As was reported along with the PayScale "findings" was this bit of information:

"It's possible that PayScale's findings differ from other conclusions because its study is based on people who choose to report their information to the site, as opposed to the Census and BLS, which have a broader reach."

That's right. The study's "findings" were based solely on people whom "chose" to report such information. In other words, the study is probably worth less than my holed-up socks after running a marathon.

Yet, even with this caveat, it appeared as if many conservative males read only what they wanted to read and made comments such as these:

"Women want children and organizing their life around their families, not stupid corporate life-sucking careers where the really big bucks and salaries are!!!

Duh!!

OMG, did I say women are different than men? What a sexist pig I am!

Where's that picture of Ursula Andress, I can escape to a time when men were men, and women were women; not politically correct bots dictated by the Dem cult."

and

"Anyone with half a brain knew this 'gender wage gap' has been a myth for quite some time now."

and

"You mean feminists have, all along, been perpetuating a myth that grants them special entitlements without the same responsibilities? I'm shocked."

There are many guys whom have never wanted to believe the gender-wage gap, so when a half-study like this comes out, these same guys don't need to take Viagra, at least for a few minutes.

However, it's just one study and a half of one, as I just referred to it due to the caveat I mentioned previously.

There have been many other studies which have been more in line with the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census data, such as a NerdScholar study which was reported two months ago, which showcased the following numbers:

- Women earn about 69% of what men do in education administrative positions

- Women earn about 68% of what men do as chief executives

- Women earn about 72% of what men do in real estate

- Women earn about 67% of what men do as marketing and sales managers

- Women earn about 69% of what men do as financial managers

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently reported the following numbers:

- Women earn about 65% of what men do as first line supervisors of housekeeping and janitorial workers

- Women earn about 64% of what men do as insurance sales agents

- Women earn about 62% of what men do as credit counselors and loan officers

- Women earn about 61% of what men do as personal financial advisors

- Women earn about 61% of what men do as property, real estate, and community association managers

Like those commentators said, the gender-wage gap must be a myth, simply because that's what they want to believe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/payscale-study-women_n_3360863.html

http://dailyfreepress.com/2013/04/01/higher-education-may-not-help-bridge-gender-wage-gap-study-suggests/

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/news/2013/04/09/59698/the-gender-wage-gap-differs-by-occupation/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...