Young Women's Pay Exceeds Male Peers'

[rdean]

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

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.

Young, Single Women Earn More Than Male Peers - WSJ.com

Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men - TIME

This is what happens when you delegitimize education. I suspect women are less likely to be swayed by peer pressure against higher education.

In terms of politics, you it will probably be more likely that these women will become liberal and democrat while these men will stick with conservative and the Republican party. Statistics have shown that people with education tend to lean liberal and Democrat.

The ramifications are that fewer women will marry before having children. Fewer children. More dissatisfied young men. More divorce.

The final outcome is that more right wing men will eventually see that education is a "good thing". This will deplete the Republican Party, making them even more desperate and marginalized or will bring much needed intellectualism to a political party that has passed from center right into far right extremism.

 

[California Girl]

It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets.

 

[Toro]

Dude, you're being ridiculous.

This has nothing to do with politics and education being "delegitimized" anything other than normal social peer pressure.

Girls, in general, value education more than boys. Doing well in school isn't cool for boys. So more boys fall out of the system.

Its good though because it shows the market at work, and there is no need for these dumb "equal pay for equal work" laws.

 

[rdean]

It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets.

No one ever accused you of being a good judge of anything. Don't you have ironing or some dishes that need to be washed?

 

[rdean]

Dude, you're being ridiculous.

This has nothing to do with politics and education being "delegitimized" anything other than normal social peer pressure.

Girls, in general, value education more than boys. Doing well in school isn't cool for boys. So more boys fall out of the system.

Its good though because it shows the market at work, and there is no need for these dumb "equal pay for equal work" laws.

Strange. First you say it has nothing to do with education being "delegitimized". Then you say, "Doing well in school isn't cool for boys." Do you see the incongruity in those two statements?

 

[California Girl]

It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets.

No one ever accused you of being a good judge of anything. Don't you have ironing or some dishes that need to be washed?

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.... personal insults. I thought you lefties were above all that 'sexism, racism' shit? I guess not, huh? When it comes to arguing with the right, any weapon is better than admitting you are intellectually unarmed. Must suck to be you.

 

[rdean]

It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets.

No one ever accused you of being a good judge of anything. Don't you have ironing or some dishes that need to be washed?

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.... personal insults. I thought you lefties were above all that 'sexism, racism' shit? I guess not, huh? When it comes to arguing with the right, any weapon is better than admitting you are intellectually unarmed. Must suck to be you.

"It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets."

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.....personal insults.

I couldn't have described you better myself. Thanks!

 

[California Girl]

No one ever accused you of being a good judge of anything. Don't you have ironing or some dishes that need to be washed?

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.... personal insults. I thought you lefties were above all that 'sexism, racism' shit? I guess not, huh? When it comes to arguing with the right, any weapon is better than admitting you are intellectually unarmed. Must suck to be you.

"It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets."

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.....personal insults.

I couldn't have described you better myself. Thanks!

Ahhhhh, the old "I have no come back so I'll go with 'I know you are but what am I?". You're too easy to be called sport. You're not even target practice.

 

[rdean]

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.... personal insults. I thought you lefties were above all that 'sexism, racism' shit? I guess not, huh? When it comes to arguing with the right, any weapon is better than admitting you are intellectually unarmed. Must suck to be you.

"It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets."

Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.....personal insults.

I couldn't have described you better myself. Thanks!

Ahhhhh, the old "I have no come back so I'll go with 'I know you are but what am I?". You're too easy to be called sport. You're not even target practice.

I made no come back. I just repeated your words.

 

[chanel]

When I was in grad sdhool, an important report was issued called "How Schools are Shortchanging the Girls" Because of this, teachers began focusing on the gender gap, and since then, more females are now graduating from college and getting advanced degrees. Now educators are saying "but what about the boys?" There are other cultural factors as well, but I do believe education is the key.

 

[rdean]

When I was in grad sdhool, an important report was issued called "How Schools are Shortchanging the Girls" Because of this, teachers began focusing on the gender gap, and since then, more females are now graduating from college and getting advanced degrees. Now educators are saying "but what about the boys?" There are other cultural factors as well, but I do believe education is the key.

I believe it's all about the "cultural" factors.

Some blacks and Hispanics see education as "acting white".

The entire Republican party has delegitimized science. That has a "trickle down" effect delegitimizing the rest of education. That is easy to see on this board with Republicans calling education a "piece of paper" and complaining that education has been taken over by liberals and is only following the "liberal" agenda.

In an institution of learning, you can't really keep on with "death panels" and "tax breaks for the rich are good" and "Saddam was behind 9/11" and "abstinence only" works and "evolution is just a theory". When people start discussing the "facts", it leaves the right wing out in the cold.

The good thing is that people are calling for "nuclear energy" and looking to science to solve problems. So it's a real tug of war right now.

 

[uscitizen]

Young men seem to be lazy as crap recently, they will not work.

 

[Big Fitz]

Quote: Originally Posted by rdean View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by California Girl View Post
It is something that will never affect you, rdrool. Intelligence and you are on different planets.
No one ever accused you of being a good judge of anything. Don't you have ironing or some dishes that need to be washed?
Ahhhh, the fall back position of the intellectually challenged.... personal insults. I thought you lefties were above all that 'sexism, racism' shit? I guess not, huh? When it comes to arguing with the right, any weapon is better than admitting you are intellectually unarmed. Must suck to be you.

His 'thanks' to you in this post smacks so much of 'thank you mistress, may I have another?'

Wow... I almost started debating Rdolt for a second. He had another semi lucid moment.

 

[Toro]

Dude, you're being ridiculous.

This has nothing to do with politics and education being "delegitimized" anything other than normal social peer pressure.

Girls, in general, value education more than boys. Doing well in school isn't cool for boys. So more boys fall out of the system.

Its good though because it shows the market at work, and there is no need for these dumb "equal pay for equal work" laws.

Strange. First you say it has nothing to do with education being "delegitimized". Then you say, "Doing well in school isn't cool for boys." Do you see the incongruity in those two statements?

No, because boys have always thought doing well in school wasn't cool. It has already been de-legitimized.

Having said that, I missed where you said peer pressure was probably the reason. That is the reason.

 

[Madeline]

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

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.

Young, Single Women Earn More Than Male Peers - WSJ.com

Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men - TIME

This is what happens when you delegitimize education. I suspect women are less likely to be swayed by peer pressure against higher education.

In terms of politics, you it will probably be more likely that these women will become liberal and democrat while these men will stick with conservative and the Republican party. Statistics have shown that people with education tend to lean liberal and Democrat.

The ramifications are that fewer women will marry before having children. Fewer children. More dissatisfied young men. More divorce.

The final outcome is that more right wing men will eventually see that education is a "good thing". This will deplete the Republican Party, making them even more desperate and marginalized or will bring much needed intellectualism to a political party that has passed from center right into far right extremism.

Jeez, and here I thought this was good news. Thankies for explaining it'll be the end of civilization, rdean. Damned broads....

 

[chanel]

It's not just the U.S. As much as rdean would like to blame the Republicans for everything, in his preferred system of socialist utopia, 1/3 of all men in England are also living with mummy and daddy.

A study has found one in three men aged between 20 and 40 is still living with their parents. This compares with one in five women of the same age.

It also emerged that one in four men who have flown the nest has kept a fully-furnished bedroom at their parents' home, just in case.

But just one in five girls has kept their childhood room after moving out.


Read more: A third of men under 40 still live at Hotel Mum | Mail Online

 

[rdean]

It's not just the U.S. As much as rdean would like to blame the Republicans for everything, in his preferred system of socialist utopia, 1/3 of all men in England are also living with mummy and daddy.

A study has found one in three men aged between 20 and 40 is still living with their parents. This compares with one in five women of the same age.

It also emerged that one in four men who have flown the nest has kept a fully-furnished bedroom at their parents' home, just in case.

But just one in five girls has kept their childhood room after moving out.


Read more: A third of men under 40 still live at Hotel Mum | Mail Online

When you are no longer living some place, you don't "keep" a bedroom there. Parents keep it for you. It's their choice.

 

[rdean]

Dude, you're being ridiculous.

This has nothing to do with politics and education being "delegitimized" anything other than normal social peer pressure.

Girls, in general, value education more than boys. Doing well in school isn't cool for boys. So more boys fall out of the system.

Its good though because it shows the market at work, and there is no need for these dumb "equal pay for equal work" laws.

Strange. First you say it has nothing to do with education being "delegitimized". Then you say, "Doing well in school isn't cool for boys." Do you see the incongruity in those two statements?

No, because boys have always thought doing well in school wasn't cool. It has already been de-legitimized.

Having said that, I missed where you said peer pressure was probably the reason. That is the reason.

You're wrong. When I was a kid, Russia sent Sputnik over the US and America freaked out.

This led to an enormous investment in this country for education and science. Haven't you wondered why America became number one in science and technology? It didn't just "happen". It only happened by design.

When I was a kid, every high school had a "science" fair and they were nearly as popular as some sports. Science fair winners brought prestige to high schools and middle schools and were reported, not only in local papers, but even on the national news.

I can't even remember hearing of a "science fair" in any high school for the last 20 years. Which is odd, because it's been during the last 20 years that the conservative right has made "liberal education" a dirty word.

 

[Toro]

Strange. First you say it has nothing to do with education being "delegitimized". Then you say, "Doing well in school isn't cool for boys." Do you see the incongruity in those two statements?

No, because boys have always thought doing well in school wasn't cool. It has already been de-legitimized.

Having said that, I missed where you said peer pressure was probably the reason. That is the reason.

You're wrong. When I was a kid, Russia sent Sputnik over the US and America freaked out.

This led to an enormous investment in this country for education and science. Haven't you wondered why America became number one in science and technology? It didn't just "happen". It only happened by design.

When I was a kid, every high school had a "science" fair and they were nearly as popular as some sports. Science fair winners brought prestige to high schools and middle schools and were reported, not only in local papers, but even on the national news.

I can't even remember hearing of a "science fair" in any high school for the last 20 years. Which is odd, because it's been during the last 20 years that the conservative right has made "liberal education" a dirty word.

Then I retract that. But it certainly wasn't cool for boys to get good marks in school when I was there 30 years ago. You were a geek or an egghead if you did. It doesn't appear to have changed.

As for blaming every single thing on conservatives, let it go. Blaming the lack of science fairs on conservatives is ridiculous.

 

[rhet 2]

No, because boys have always thought doing well in school wasn't cool. It has already been de-legitimized.

Having said that, I missed where you said peer pressure was probably the reason. That is the reason.

You're wrong. When I was a kid, Russia sent Sputnik over the US and America freaked out.

This led to an enormous investment in this country for education and science. Haven't you wondered why America became number one in science and technology? It didn't just "happen". It only happened by design.

When I was a kid, every high school had a "science" fair and they were nearly as popular as some sports. Science fair winners brought prestige to high schools and middle schools and were reported, not only in local papers, but even on the national news.

I can't even remember hearing of a "science fair" in any high school for the last 20 years. Which is odd, because it's been during the last 20 years that the conservative right has made "liberal education" a dirty word.

Then I retract that. But it certainly wasn't cool for boys to get good marks in school when I was there 30 years ago. You were a geek or an egghead if you did. It doesn't appear to have changed.

As for blaming every single thing on conservatives, let it go. Blaming the lack of science fairs on conservatives is ridiculous.

To some degree, that stigma has diluted, especially with the "jock-with-brains" being pushed by the coaches.

But, I think two factors are pushing the female earnings upward.

1) as someone else noted, there was a shift in the late 1970s/early 1980s, courtesy largely of Gloria Steinhem and her cohorts, to OVER emphasize the girls and ignore the boys -- and inversion of earlier patterns -- so now the boys get smushed down and girls get the majority of the attention -- this IS being addressed in some teacher certification college programs, BTW

2) when the West industrialized, the workplace shifted to factories, with women, who had traditionally worked side by side in the store or the carpenter shop or on the farm suddenly relegated to Stay at Home Mom/June Cleaver roles.

This left upper middle class women, who could afford childcare and housekeepers, with lots of time on their hands for social activism -- hence, the American Red Cross, the Salvation Army, huge involvement in the Abolitionist movement, and then into Temperance and Women's Rights.

Post WW1, that was closed off a bit, men like Woodrow Wilson taking dominance in "social do-gooderism" with an expanding demand for better education for girls than the earlier watered down gunk they'd had before the war.

The Depression ended a LOT of free time for women, pushing women into low-paying low-status work that nevertheless was critical to family survival, especially when "Dad" wound up laid off from his factory or commercial job.

Then WW2 and the birth of Rosie the Riveter: women could and did take on the jobs males only had worked previously -- and the economy boomed because of the military industrial complex. War ends, men come home -- no jobs, in a shrinking job market because of reduced military production demands -- and women were NOT going back to June Cleaver/Temperance Marcher status -- they LIKED THE MONEY -- so, the GI Bill is passed to put the newly returned vets into PROFESSIONAL jobs, while Wife kept the mid-paying mid-status ones they'd opened up during the war.

During the 1960s and 1970s, divorce rates soared -- and Hippie-ism hit -- suddenly you've got women -- ex-wives, single moms -- who NEED better jobs -- and the women's rights movement, including NOW, is reborn, on steroids. Girls are not just PERMITTED into the professions, they're DRIVEN into the professions -- in deliberate conscious on-purpose competition with boys -- and girls get a lot of focus from teachers and school boards everywhere. Courtesy of really loud activists like Bella Abzug.

Now, we're not living in single-income family situations. We've got TWO incomes -- both earned away from home and family -- with kids NOT INVOLVED at all.

Actually, the top 20% of population in terms of income are two-income families, with one child, usually, some with two. The bottom 20% are primarily single moms with only their own below poverty earnings plus some government subsidies, supporting 3 and more kids, often by multiple fathers, not paying child support.

To get that bottom 20% off the public dole (balance the budget, yes?), the government is again pushing education for WOMEN, especially -- and it IS a major social problem, given the often neglected situation of those kids, whose primary stability comes ONLY through the public schools.

Yet, at the same time, we do, IMO, need to give the boys the same sort of boost we gave girls in the 1970s and 1980s, doing more to encourage and motivate boys -- not at the neglect of the girls, mind you, in a return to the dumb ass pre-1960s pattern -- EQUAL attention, EQUAL support in the affective domain -- and one of the biggest crises we face is the total lack of male supportive family conditions -- Big Brothers can do a lot -- but it is NOT a full type male parental role model, living in the same household, with a balanced male-female relationship to stabilize the young child's early psychological conditioning and predispositioning.

To aid in developing more effective intervention through the schools and other social aid programs, I'd really like to see more attention paid to Vygotsky and Bandura's theories. Skinner and Mann just are NOT working, not in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, not given the dysfunctional family situations too many kids and parents and teachers are dealing with.

But the problem is NOT females earning more -- the problem is males giving up and not even trying, while society continues to drive girls into greater achievement, greater competitiveness, too, combined with severe reduction in parental direct contact and influence, especially MALE parent role modeling.