Obama is a full blown marxist

[Annie]

Well, you should quit harping then, because they don't.

I don't think men should be cheated out of higher quality relationships with their children because they have to put food on the table. And then later cheated out of custody should a divorce rear its ugly head and they get the label of not being the "primary caretaker". Works both ways.

They all can be rectified by personal choices. There is no real "problem", not counting the one between your ears.

Some of what you say is true, some is as nonsensical as rants that women should be able to make choices without consequences.

The 'mommy track' has always been about upper middle class and upper class women. I could stay home for 14 years, well because I could. To me the sacrifices, (more than a vacation a year, more restaurants than four or five a month, a Caravan rather than a Volvo), were worth being home. My choice and my spouse's. If he'd been make $50k, probably would have been a no go, not for that long.

Did I pay a higher price for being out of the work world for so long? Yep, upon divorce I was in a tough place. Then again, child support helped me get my children raised and I was able to find a position. I already had two degrees, going back for a third and teaching credentials wasn't a problem. However being nearly 40 and taking a new career track was.

Bottom line, the choices I made were mine. From getting married, to having three children, to staying home, to returning to school.

 

[busara]

Well, you should quit harping then, because they don't.

I don't think men should be cheated out of higher quality relationships with their children because they have to put food on the table. And then later cheated out of custody should a divorce rear its ugly head and they get the label of not being the "primary caretaker". Works both ways.

They all can be rectified by personal choices. There is no real "problem", not counting the one between your ears.

what are you even talking about? your own source said that women only made equal pay when they were single w/o kids. otherwise, they make less. and the examples you gave, trying to get sympathy for men (which i am one) are irrelevent. they are a result of the parents choices on how to raise their children, which is one of those personal choices you like to talk about. the man could easily stay at home more. why doesnt he? personnal choice. and the divorce thing, well, that may very well be due to prejudices in the judicial system. oh, but thats just reality, right? cant do anything there.

youre just arguing for the sake of it, arent you?

 

[editec]

Determining whether woman are (on average) being paid less than men simply because they are women should be easy to do.

Simply take a stistically significant number of women and men in the same professions and follow their careers over time.

If there is an obvious bias against paying women with the same credientials and work history as men, it will show up.

Simply looking at the raw numbers without taking into account professions, work histories and so forth is bound to mislead us.

Why nobody has ever done that, I cannot say.

I suspect it's because the outcome won't jibe with what people WANT TO BELIEVE.

 

[nomdeplume]

youre just arguing for the sake of it, arent you?

Dude, you are talking into the mirror. You haven't a made cognet, substantive contribution to this thread yet. You just keep vomiting up the same canard:

"i dont feel it is right for women to make less simply for having a family"

 

[busara]

Dude, you are talking into the mirror. You haven't a made cognet, substantive contribution to this thread yet. You just keep vomiting up the same canard:

"i dont feel it is right for women to make less simply for having a family"

wow, you actually read something i wrote didnt you? good for you. i have to keep repeating myself because you dont read anything else, not even your own source. but i get it now, you believe discrimination is justified so long as it doesnt affect you. and whenever i bring up a criticism of your point, you ignore it and post something like this. are you training to be a politician?

 

[nomdeplume]

Why nobody has ever done that, I cannot say.

I suspect it's because the outcome won't jibe with what people WANT TO BELIEVE.

It's been done several times now. It doesn't support what the left propagandizes, hence such findings are sequestered away from the general public in economic journals.

 

[busara]

It's been done several times now. It doesn't support what the left propagandizes, hence such findings are sequestered away from the general public in economic journals.

VUCast: Vanderbilt University's News Network

Why Women Still Earn Less Than Men - Brief Article | Workforce | Find Articles at BNET

GAO Report: Why Women Still Make Less than Men

yep, none of these talk about a glass ceiling. its all al lie

 

[Ravi]

Determining whether woman are (on average) being paid less than men simply because they are women should be easy to do.

Simply take a stistically significant number of women and men in the same professions and follow their careers over time.

If there is an obvious bias against paying women with the same credientials and work history as men, it will show up.

Simply looking at the raw numbers without taking into account professions, work histories and so forth is bound to mislead us.

Why nobody has ever done that, I cannot say.

I suspect it's because the outcome won't jibe with what people WANT TO BELIEVE.

It's been done, but not by unbiased groups...if their are such things. I read somewhere that all things being equal, women in the US make 98% of what men do. True or not it hardly is a reason to let an employer off the hook for the odd discrimination.