Obama WH Pays Women Less Than Men (o.dailycaller.com)

{Feminism}

9 ups - 9 downs = 0 votes

4 comments submitted at 14:28:55 on Apr 7, 2014 by BuSpocky

  • [-]
  • timoppenheimer
  • 8 Points
  • 15:44:59, 7 April

Hours worked, qualifications, position held... these are all important factors that are not taken into account. On top of that, women are making more money in the white house every year, according to the article. This is going in the direction feminism would desire, AND THE FACTORS THAT WE ALL AGREE SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN DECIDING HOW MUCH TO PAY PEOPLE ARE IGNORED.

This is both an ongoing win for feminism (women are earning more in the white house) and an intellectually dishonest paper (literally no factors are accounted for other than gender).

Here's the raw data.

https://opendata.socrata.com/Government/2013-Report-to-Congress-on-White-House-Staff/44xn-rs2p

If you sort by position, you'll find that most positions pay a flat rate to both men and to women. There are some outliers for women making more than average and less than average. If this actually matters to you, I'll redo the analysis for you in a way that takes position into account and we can compare people within the same profession. I'll even post my excel sheets.

There actually is an interesting point to be made about the data that this article doesn't quite get at: women are less prevalent in higher-status positions. However, this may be because women are choosing not to take on as many responsibilities as men.

Here's a woman bringing up this issue, so you can't just dismiss me as a misogynist. http://www.ted.com/talks/sherylsandbergwhywehavetoofewwomenleaders

"The problem, I am convinced, is that women are dropping out [of the most demanding professions]"

So what do you say? Can we agree that this article is dishonest? Do you want me to prove it?

  • [-]
  • ModFemme
  • 1 Points
  • 16:41:31, 7 April

You're dancing on the edge of a comment hostile to feminism. Please try to be as respectful as possible. But because your criticism is relevant, sourced and might be promoting further learning, I won't remove it.

>Here's a woman bringing up this issue, so you can't just dismiss me as a misogynist.

Be cautious in thinking you can't present an anti-feminist position just because a woman said it. A large part of Sandberg's book is how women hold themselves back.

>Hours worked, qualifications, position held [...] women are less prevalent in higher-status positions. However, this may be because women are choosing not to take on as many responsibilities as men.

This is an even bigger problem! I hope you're not implying that the fault falls solely on women, though. There's a reason women are less prevalent in higher-status positions. Do women have equal access to these positions?

  • [-]
  • hugged_at_gunpoint
  • 1 Points
  • 17:16:10, 7 April

If you examine the article’s cited analysis (http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/16/analysis-men-still-make-a-lot-more-than-women-in-obamas-white-house/) you find that they’re just taking the average wage of all the female staffers and comparing it to the average wage of all the male staffers. No control for variables like seniority, the pay grade of each position, hours worked, etc. The author even cites the thoroughly misleading national pay gap statistic, which is similarly unrefined and a poor metric to make any conclusions about discrimination.

Seems like another misleading dig at President Obama.

  • [-]
  • Lyra_Eurydice
  • 1 Points
  • 15:17:43, 7 April

Here's a petition to support the Paycheck Fairness Act. I'd recommend for everyone to sign it.

http://act.democracyforamerica.com/sign/PaycheckFairness?source=NOW