Slashdot Mirror
Even On eBay, Women Get Paid Less For Their Labor (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes: Women in the United States are paid only 79 cents on the dollar compared with men doing the same job. But at least gender melts away in the digital economy of the Internet, right? Nope. A study of more than 1 million auctions on the online commerce site eBay finds that women receive consistently less money than men for selling the very same products. T: The oft-cited "cents on the dollar" claims, though, ought perhaps be taken with a grain of salt; it depends who's counting, and what.
More to the point, I was under the understanding that the majority of online purchased are now made BY women. ;)
So, women are paying women less for items? Wow, do we need a whole new ism for that?
The usual 'lets make up some numbers and cry from the rooftop' bunk. The gender 'pay gap' has been
solidly debunked (and in fact shown to be slightly pro-women) as soon as you include time in the job as
a factor (which it most certainly needs to be).
However, how about a little focus on something that IS real. The males excluded from teaching gap!
Dont take my word for it, go and have a look at who is teaching our children. Equality? you better not
be wanting any of THAT, men have been forced out in droves by exactly the people who are squealing
for 'equality'. After all, hearts and minds people, get them while they are young!
Over the top hyperbole? of course, but that seems to be the way this is played now, which is a great
pity, but really, men have being actively pushed out of teaching at a huge rate, and no one cares?
And lets not even go near mens health, death rates, the whitewashing of prostate cancer, etc. Lets
just sweep that all under the carpet, what REALLY matters is making sure all CEOs are women! go team!
What's even sad is something like heart disease is now being gendered. http://www.burlingtoncoatfacto...
I hear an asteroid is going to hit the Earth and kill all human inhabitants, women most affected.
They are making the same invalid assumption as the Github study, namely that sellers that identify their gender are statistically the same as those that don't. In fact, the Github study itself showed that they don't. The difference is probably something harmless; for example, it is possible (even likely) that older people tend to use their first names more frequently, and are more likely to have first names that can be classified by gender.
I agree that representing your gender is 'immaterial' though not necessarily 'stupid' if you want to try to garner support from your gender or otherwise play on the expectation that 'helping women succeed based only on their gender is a good thing'...I just bought a bottle of CLR at Walmart & was surprised to see on the label 'Woman Owned'...when I saw that I thought 'Seriously, you want me to base a decision on that? As a man I'm insulted & I should just put this back to make a point'...given I wanted to try CLR for a while I bought it anyway but since it didn't exactly knock my socks off (nor worse or better than other cleaning products) I'm also just as inclined never to buy it again BECAUSE of that label...you can say I'm discriminating if you want but the company owners shouldn't be trying to use their gender as a means to expect me to buy their product...they want me to 'discriminate for them' and as such I'm perfectly comfortable using that against them.
That seems really weird to me, because in my experience playing EVE Online as a scammer (the gain-your-trust-and-exploit-it type scams, not the spam-contracts-in-local type scams), my female avatar had a 99.9% better success rate than my male avatar ever did. Granted I never did a remotely scientific comparison between the two (I used my male main character for a few days at first with no success, then switched over to the female alt, had success in the first hour, never looked back), but I always assumed after that that people who at least appeared to be female in a mildly convincing manner online had an advantage in online transactions.
There is nothing new about this 'ism. Talk to any female manager, and most of them will tell you they have more problems with female subordinates than with male subordinates.
My wife agrees. The men she supervised were in construction - hardly a bastion of SNAGS (Sensitive New Age Guys) The women? Sneaky, backstabbing and gossipy. The men loved her and did what they were told. The women? Well, one did. And she was another Alpha chick. The rest were more interested in who was supposedly laying who to get ahead, and "I hate that bitch, she's so skinny and pretty!"
As I've noted before, at some point, some how some way, we're going to have to acknowledge that not only men have issues. Many women stand in the way of other women's success. How can that be fixed when we are only allowed to believe it is men.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.