+Greg. Sym. Watched the video and its horrible. Oliver who seems like an intelligent guy, is promoting this laughable myth that men pay women less than men because they are women.
+Greg. Sym. Indeed, there's people saying things over and over which were _addressed in the video_. I think a lot of people must've just seen that this was advocating for the wage gap and ignored the rest in order to just type out an angry comment? (sigh)
+Hans Tjelle "different carees actually paying different wages" Yes, sure. Mathematitians that have been studying advanced math for years and took their degrees on statistics didn't take into account the career choices women make that result in completely different jobs. They compared all jobs at the same time, even if that meant comparing a man CEO and a woman maid. They just needed YOU to tell them how to do their job properly.
Actually, he hit upon something that I might consider a very good idea for job applications: leave off the person's name when considering applications for employment. Why? Because a person's name, while useful in background checks, has absolutely no bearing on their hire-ability. Same goes with gender.
Emperor of Fail Yes, which is why I clarified that. "Because a person's name, while useful in background checks..." This would simply require that there be a stage where those with successful background checks are then stripped down to only relevant information for the rest of the hiring process.
John didn't talk about how women are much more likely to choose lower paying college majors, and how men are two times more likely to work a 40 hour work week than women, or how women have lower unemployment and far lower unemployment rates than men.
+Sém because they believe that men are more capable of getting the job done nonetheless. Back then, women were not permitted to go to school, work in offices, fight wars, etc. This is not because people thought women were 'incapable' of performing such tasks, but because they supposedly were not 'made for it'.
Giannelly Rodriguez _"back then"_ I'm talking about *now*. If women do the exact same work and cost 1/5th price of a male, why don't companies just hire women?
According to this video, they've exposed enough. and money is only a factor of the primary issue. As well as the issue regarding not just womens soccer.
John Oliver probably understands all too well. But John Oliver also has a hefty paycheck and John Oliver also has a boss who has another boss who gets some hefty contributions from some people.
6:48 Is no one going to notice that someone is using a Nerf N-strike Deploy against a Nerf N-strike Elite Rapidstrike? It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight, the Deploy is woefully underpowered and unreliable, while the Rapidstrike is a Fully Automatic, Flywheel powered blaster in the Elite line, it will overpower any pre-elite blaster
@@VeraTheTabbynx Yeah.... I have a Longshot (Elite Repaint) and it's not as powerful as people say it is, I even removed the AR and still get around 60fps
Chetz Well, i would assume that paying less women would come from a prejudiced view that they are less qualified. If you believe the woman is going to do the exact same job but not as well, it would be normal for you to not pay her as well, too.
Zift Ylrhavic Resfear They are less qualified for some jobs, just like men are less qualified for some jobs as well. Just how the world works. Most women just can't lift as much as most men, that's just nature. Now certain jobs that can be done by both the same I certainly think they should be paid the same, but I am pretty sure this has been debunked because the studies they did didn't actually compare men and women in the same job, just men's total wages vs womens total wages across the country in all jobs. So let's say 500k men are polled and 500k women are polled. 20k men make less than 50k a year, 40k women make less than 50k a year, they would use that to justify the study and say there is a wage gap when it's not actually pertaining to equal work.
Daniel DeFrancesco Not to mention hours worked. The comparison is often between total earnings but not even hourly wages because men work more hours than women, on average
Tyler Torrey "Women account for something like 70% of our government spending on healthcare." May i have the source of this please? "When an employer pays a woman 77%, he is simply reimbursing himself for future expenditures." You know there are assurances in place just for that. Wait a minute, i forgot i didn't live in the US, and seeing how messed up their system is, that might not be the case, so i take that back. But let's consider this : since you don't know who is going to take a maternity leave, isn't it unfair to underpay everyone?
the wage gap is less beating a dead horse and more dragging its rotted carcass around and insisting it's still alive and that you're a misogynist for saying otherwise.
'where women are allocated to occupations and establisments that pay lower wages' That's literally in the first paragraph of the introduction lol. Women go into lower paying careers, by choice, the wage gap isn't some patriarchal scheme it's the result of choices.
+TheLunarLegend So you're refuting the Yale study, where a female-sounding name on a resume results in a lower salary offer than an identical resume with a male name? Were their research methods faulty? Cite your sources, please.
yruu113 Maybe cause women negotiate less, or maybe the men AND women that made those offers are sick of women being pushed through cause of screaming feminists that went into gender studies instead of a STEM field, or maybe the name John being shorter than Jennifer made it stick in the head more so they kept going over it and remembered the details of the resume better, maybe they sent the female ones to smaller labs with fewer resources than they sent the male ones to. There are a lot of reasons that could explain this. But no they just jump straight to sexism without looking at the variables just like every other idiot that believes in the gender pay gape. And yes i believe there are idiots in Yale before you say it, you can literally buy your way in. Not like it's MENSA where you at least need to be smart to get in.
There is still a logical problem with this whole thing. If a corporation can truly get away with something that is as patently illegal as gender pay discrimination then why would they hire men at all? Couldn't they save 22% in wages in doing that? Secondly, i hate to say this but yes what job you get is going to effect how much money you make. So if women statistically works at jobs that pay less, work less hours and take years off work to raise children then your not going to make less money as a guy with a higher paying job, that works more hours and does not take years off to raise children. Which men statistically do more often. This is facts here, not sexism or misogyny. Biology exist, we are a sexually dimorphic species. Get used to it. And when that is taken all into account then the earnings gap (which is what it is) is about 4%. So... Does that mean that there is gender pay discrimination? Possibly, there could be other factors involved. But i think you should consider that if it is gender pay discrimination 4% is a massive improvement over 22%. Like, 5 times better. But hey, those kind of numbers don't get peoples attention right? So in order to fix this "wage gap" you simply want to pay women more for work they haven't done souly based on the fact that they are female? Isn't that gender pay discrimination to? So will two wrongs make a right? God i sound like a kinder garden teacher... And hey, that study about names on resumes is quite disturbing. There is also one that shows something like it with non European names to. But it seems to only really be effecting pay by bout 4%. You see what i did there? Like i said, that 4% is still there and like the study mentioned it could be because pay discrimination. Kind of like how male models get payed about 4 times less the a female would, and were talking about the same job with same amount of hours. Odd how no one talks about that. Also i would like to point out that women between the ages of 20-30 are also earning more money the men currently. Not sure if that also included the old children less women mentioned in the video. Women also earn 60% of collage and university degrees. I could keep going. Anyways i consider the "wage gap" to be misleading at best and down right dishonest at worst. Does it exist? Kind of, that 4% discrepancy is not impossible but like i said before. It could be from pay discrimination.
N3rdSci3nc3 ssshhh Reason and logic are tools of the patriarchy to oppress women. "And hey, that study about names on resumes is quite disturbing." It's just as flawed as all the other "studies".
jeffiek I have read about some ideas of why those studies ended up the way they did. One reason is that since women are more likely to not not stay at the job long they get offered less. Or it could have something to do that woman are more likely to stir up trouble in the work place basically making them walking, talking lawsuits.
*"There is still a logical problem with this whole thing. If a corporation can truly get away with something that is as patently illegal as gender pay discrimination then why would they hire men at all? Couldn't they save 22% in wages in doing that?"* Because if you're filling your staff with women, at some point some of those women logically have to get promoted to management. At which point the whole system falls down, because they're not going to be on board with that rather crappy plan. That and at some point, if you're doing it that systematically, there's going to be enough evidence for you to get sued to hell. And that's more expensive than saving wages. *"But i think you should consider that if it is gender pay discrimination 4% is a massive improvement over 22%. Like, 5 times better."* Someone appears to have taken a dump on my desk ...
So, you're telling me that the magical system just completely overrides corperations need to make money? I dont think so. And if they can already get away with it like i said then way waste the money? You did not give me a counter argument you just kind made a claim without evidence. And for your second point, making a joke is not a counter argument.
N3rdSci3nc3 I think you may be responding to a different comment by accident, because that had no relation to anything I said. I'm telling you that if you fill your organisation with women, said women become an overwhelming majority and you might find that, in America, when the majority of a workforce is unhappy at being underpaid there's a thing called "unions". Common sense, buddy. Not that hard.
"the wage gap is simply the average earnings of men and women per year. It does not take into account hours worked. It does not take into account different job positions, or different jobs." -Wage gap button
@@JoseMartinez-qr9pj what's even more stupid is how john takes the argument in 4:05 and use it as if it was a complete evidence that the wage gap have nothing to do with work hours or work positions . The show has a very professional research team so it's hard to believe that this was unintentional mistake .
@Technically Difficulties The reason we have a wage gap and the reason it doesn’t take time or position into account is because women aren’t offered the same positions as men. Most time what happens is two people are up for a position one man and one women even if the women is more qualified she might not get the position. That’s why position and hours aren’t taken into account it’s not because people have different jobs or positions it’s because women even if more qualified don’t get the same positions or jobs as men just because they are a women. Women may also not be put up for a promotion when a man is. I’m sure in certain places there is a man and a women in the same position and the women is earning less. Women have to work twice as hard to get the positions they want even if they are qualified. Sometimes a women will be the interviewer and have a man and a women with the same qualifications and still pick the man. You would think a women would pick a women. It is underlying sexism that we are conditioned to have. If we wouldn’t see gender we wouldn’t have this problem. I am assuming you are a man and have never had to deal with not getting a promotion you are qualified for because of your gender or not taken seriously when you try and say something, being interrupted like you don’t matter, had to sit back and watch while two men talk about something and being put down when you try and contribute. Women are treated like children. The age gap is the way it is because of that.
@@ogdog5589 Lets pick apart your argument. "women aren’t offered the same positions as men." This is irrelevant. You as a person apply to job. Why would you take a Job you didn't apply for? "Most time what happens is two people are up for a position one man and one women even if the women is more qualified she might not get the position." This depends on the the field the person is going into. Anything like healthcare, child care/development(including education), and low woman work forces(STEM, Tech) you will find that woman will get the job before men. For example women in the It and software development field are three times more likely to get the job when compared to a male with the same experience. "That’s why position and hours aren’t taken into account" no the reason why hours isn't taken into account is because the federal government only tracks if you work part time or full time, how much you make, and your gender. This is the data that they use for these studies. "Women may also not be put up for a promotion when a man" I'm going to ignore this point because of your next point. "I’m sure in certain places there is a man and a women in the same position and the women is earning less." Your literally just adding in your own opinion as a supporting argument. "Women have to work twice as hard to get the positions they want even if they are qualified" There have been a number of studies that show in a that when compared with woman men work longer hours and are available for more hours of the day. These studies also shown that in competitive fields on average men will work more that 40 hours a week where woman work less than 40 a week. "If we wouldn’t see gender we wouldn’t have this problem" that is the issue. You are only seeing the gender and that is forming the problem. Yes I will admit that the corporate world has sexist dinosaurs at the top of the ladder, but you can't make the facts fit your theory. "I am assuming you are a man and have never had to deal with not getting a promotion you are qualified" Yes as a man I have. I work in one of those listed fields above. I have a 70% chance to not get a promotion because I work with a woman and she does the job just as well as men. Why you ask, well because she is a woman and i'm a man. "had to sit back and watch while two men talk about something and being put down when you try and contribute. Women are treated like children. The age gap is the way it is because of that." This one just sounds like you got treated like a child and your salty about it. I will respond to it non the less. Men tend to be more logic oriented than woman, men also tend to be more to the point where woman tend to take the long way around. I can see a woman make a comment about something and the males does understand how that would be relevant. (my gf does this all of the time) Now lets talk about some of the things you didn't mention. Men tend to have a higher salary than woman. Men also tend to argue for their salary more than woman. What about the woman who want a child, they get paid less right? well yes and no. Lets start with taking maternity leave. They are leaving the work force for an amount of time. They are losing out is experience and/or qualifications. When they come back why would someone who is less qualified get paid the same and the rest? Regardless of if a woman took maternity leave or not, woman who have a child tend to have more responsibility out side of work as they have a child. This lead the employee to have less responsibilities at work, which results in less pay. One can fix this by asking for more responsibilities at work and auguring a higher wage. Show the company that work comes before the baby. Sounds dumb right, right. Then why do single woman get paid more than men. Lets talk about that for just a moment. Why do single woman get paid more than men? Could it be that single woman are ambiguous and have a career goal in mind and want to achieve? Could it be that single woman have no other persons responsibilities so they can work harder and longer? Could it be that single woman take want they want and leave the rest (aka being very direct)? I think its all of the above. finally my favorite argument (it just make so much sense). If a company could pay woman 70% less then a man, why don't they hire just woman? That could same some companies millions of dollars.
E. David but all they have to do is raise a female employees wage 17 cents but your right not so simple and its only 17 cents its not like the get 50 cents less than a man
It's 2016 people. John Oliver is a white progressive male, I think it's time to replace him with a woman. Come on John, as a white male, you are too privileged. Do it for your beliefs. Step down and let a woman do your job.
You hear blatant sexism against men nearly every time a feminists discusses a gender issue. Try calling them on it instead of harassing men who realize equality isn't just a self serving mind game manipulative women play on men to get stuff from people who are clearly sympathetic to their needs and issues. Treating people who you know care about as if they hate you is a form of psychological abuse. Men care deeply about women and it would help if we had a culture that recognized that instead of gas lighting men to make them easier to control.
I'm sorry John, but you have to compare women and men in the same job. A lot of those fox arguments, as much as I hate to admit it, were valid. A better solution to this problem is paid maternal leave. Also you said that in the Harvard experiment that it was $4000 dollars less for Jennifer, but what was the average for the man? Because if we're talking about a $250000 job, that would be statistically insignificant, however you may have a point if we're talking a minimum wage job. And I am not saying I would fight against legislation to get equal pay because 1) it already exists and 2) it would be harmless as long as it doesn't say something like "women have to be paid more than men". The remaining 5 to 8 cents could be partially fixed paid family and medical leave. or maybe you could post everyone's pay for everyone to see to avoid those times when there is discrimination, But the rest can be explained by unfortunate circumstances such as due to biology, women are the only gender that can have babies, and most often take care of the baby after that. So jobs that have less flexible hours often can't have as many women in them.
+w3irdo13 There's the whole burden of proof issue. If you claim the wage gap is a result of discrimination you need to prove it. And the "god in the gaps" is no form of proof.
John Oliver is dead wrong in this argument. Usually I like him and he usually is right factually, but he was absolutely wrong on this one and is letting his liberal bias cloud his judgement, by the way I am a liberal but I think for myself not mindlessly agree with everyone else. I mean he cherry picked one new study to dispute the argument that women pick different jobs and thus get paid differently, well John what about all the other studies huh? There are literally hundreds of studies that show the difference is around 94-96 cents to every dollar a man makes when you take into account all factors like what the job is, how much experience, etc., and even then it is still debatable whether the 5% difference is discrimination. This isn't sexism... I mean sexism still exist in some cases, like slut shaming, etc. But many other cases its exaggerated and blamed on "patriarchy" or some other made up feminist bullshit, like "subject acting on object" which is quite funny and flat out retarded logic. Modern feminism is not based on facts or reasoning...
***** All I am saying is the problem is exaggerated, I love how riled up you get in the 5% difference in pay, yet you probably have no problem men paying for dinner and buying expense jewelery with almost no resale value. Do you have a problem with the custom of men buying expense rings for women when proposing? I am sure you are as passionate during divorce settlements and child custody hearing too right?
***** Yea right, I find that difficult to believe. But if what you say is true than I applaud you for your fairness, unfortunately the rest of society doesn't follow your example, your in the minority.
Daoyi Liu These are not hasty conclusions. Why did I not believe when Dutchess said she didn't ask her significant other to buy her things, its because that is not the norm. I did not falsely assume that women act this way, many women do. I mean look valentines day is coming and the ads are filled with companies convincing men to buy expensive jewelry for women so they can be happy. Its advertised on such a continuous basis every year because its a cultural norm not an oddity. Also if you don't believe me look at divorce settlement and child custody statistics and come back to me. Majority of the time women are favored by a huge margin, in fact sometimes judges can even pardon prenuptials if they choose to for some bullshit reason. There is a reason why almost 70% of all divorces in the US are initiated by women, its because they have everything to gain from it. The point is, you and other modern feminists are hyper aware of sexism that is faced by women, but constantly ignore the blatant double standards and prejudices faced by men. You assume that they have some special "privilege" and thus there problems are not as important. What about the fact that almost 80% of homeless people are males? What about the fact that 60% of all college students are female? What about the fact that 80% of child custody decisions are won by women? What about the fact that if you're a women you have a much higher chance of escaping jail sentences as opposed to men solely based on your sex? And cultural norms where men have to provide and are constantly bombarded by society that they have to support a women with money because women want to feel "secure"? These aren't random misinformed views of mine, these are facts that you refuse to acknowledge because of your bias. And again, a 5% (it is 5%, not 5-17, not maybe, its 5%) difference in wage gap is not necessarily sexism it might be something else attributed to gender but not necessarily on the part of the employer. For instance, its proven that men negotiate much better for a higher salary, than women. It might be because women are MORE LIKELY to be unsure/less confident about themselves, and that is probably biological as well.
***** Classic straw-man argument, when did I say you forced your man to cough up his money? Typical feminist self-victimization so you can feel better about yourself, do you get a kick out of it or something? Its cultural, its society that tells him and women that what men "should" do because women need to feel secured and loved, etc. Its a mixture of sexual dimorphism and cultural norms. Its a fact that men favor looks much more than status, while women on the other look at status (fame, money, etc.) more than physical appearances to find a suitable mate., its biology/evolution.
Daoyi Liu I don't even know where to start. Because you constantly create straw-man arguments... 1: Correlation doesn't equal causation. Homelessness and college attendance is not relevant to the topic of wage gap. Of course it is, if the problem with wage gap is sexism, which what you are constantly spouting then so are those glaring issues that heavily favorable to women. 2: It is between 5% and 17%. I am not going to cherry pick these numbers. In the lower percentile, it may indeed be because of lack of negotiation and confidence. In these cases, it is important to teach women to be more assertive in wage negotiations, not ignore the problem and belittle their attempts. But in the upper percentile, this is not necessarily the case. It has been scientifically proven that many women get less starting salaries even to begin negotiations (and btw the prejudice comes from both men AND women, this isn't a competition, this is a battle against societal norms). No matter how rare it is, as long as it still happens, it needs to be addressed. I don't know why you're so opposed to this. There is nothing to cherry pick the number is around 5%, than "between 5-17", if you cannot admit this than you're in denial. Its important to know this because it highlights the extent of the problem, a 17% difference almost certainly has to be partly because of sexism, while 5% on the other hand doesn't because its too small to make conclusion on the whole population. And the 5% difference can be a host of other factors, do you understand statistic incorporates error when making inferences on a huge population? They don't actually tally every single man and women in the US they take "random" sample and then this in itself creates error. That 5% is almost negligible and can be attributed to multiple factors, but you reach the conclusion its sexism. 3: Progress is about CHANGING the norms when they become irrelevant. That means CHANGING the perception that men should pay for everything even if he's earning less or can't afford it, changing the perception that women should be paid less, and changing the perception that men cannot be good caretakers. If a man proves to be a better caretaker than his ex-wife, then he should get custody. Gender bias harms everyone, and this is something even feminists agree with. You are, once again, assuming things about people despite everything I talked about in my previous comment. If feminist agree with this then why is child custody laws favored 80% to women? I mean that is a glaring difference, and one that can be directly related to sexism, yet you're getting worked up over the 5% in pay that may or may not be sexism. Yup that's equality for ya, "ladies first." 4: Nobody is blatantly ignoring the problems that men face. Talking about women's problems doesn't automatically silence men's problems. No problems that are obviously distinguished as sexism should be addressed, the problems I mentioned are mind-numbingly obvious, the 5% difference isn't. 5: Privilege does not negate disadvantage. A black person can still support gay rights. A man can support women's rights, and a woman can and should support and address the problems that men face. Even poor people can and should have sympathy for the problems of the rich, but this takes strong moral character that many people lack. I don't why you are telling me this, maybe you should read it...because I want equality, not constantly support modern feminist agenda about the victimization of women, since they often refuse to acknowledge or do anything for men. And if you think feminism supports men's right as much as women's, than you're in denial and part of the problem. 6: I never claimed to be feminist, and I agree that many people go overboard. But I see problems where they arise and believe that problems should be dealt with, not ignored simply because they are problems of people I disagree with. I don't know where your prejudices come from, whether it's from personal experience or simply what you see in the media, but sweeping generalizations and making moral decisions based on stereotypes is just not good. You shouldn't refuse to interact with black people just because there are black people in prison, and you shouldn't get angry about wage equality simply because some women are privileged and sexist. Again, I don't think you understand. I want equality, but I want the issues that glaringly sexist fixed first. I don't want people constantly bring in to light the 5% difference and claiming its sexism. I mean where is the uproar over the 20%, difference in college student admittance, and there is not debate over that figure. Where is the cry from feminism to fix this obvious problem, I mean its a 20% difference, I hope you understand this. I could go on, but I doubt you'll read it all. I have a feeling you're not here to have a conversation. There are those who are genuinely angry at people who fight for change, and think everyone should just shut up and take a spoonful of sugar with all their problems. I have feeling you aren't actually listing to what I am saying and have preconceived notion of what I believe. You keep creating straw-man arguments so its easier to debate them, yet I doubt you'll read this considering you're in denial over reality.
That wage gap statistic is actually false. The 77 cent figure was made comparing all working men to all working women. They did NOT keep in mind that men have more higher paying jobs that women. And that is not, comparing the same job in the same field, that is comparing all of the women who are teachers, to all the men who are nuclear physicists, and they are upset that pay is not equal. Men are the vast majority in 9 out of 10 highest payed careers, architects engineers etc. Women are the same, but with the LOWEST paying careers. This is not discrimination, it is just the path our economy has taken.
***** Not to say that there is no wage gap at all, but if you compare those in the same career and same field, it is much MUCH less prominent. And that is something which will likely never be fixed in an open market economy such as ours.
Mr. Man Lightnin Could you site your source for that? It's just that my understanding was it was an average in like for like jobs. I don't think anyone is trying to compare being a cleaner with the head of a fortune 500 company.
Rodrigo de Toni That's a pretty retarded claim. If the sexes act differently it makes them both sexist? That essentially what you are putting forward. The fact that more women take careers such as nursing or teaching, and the fact that more men have careers like architect or physicist is not sexism in our culture, it is biology. And before you do, do not go saying that our biology is sexist just because men are naturally stronger and women are naturally drawn toward raising children.
***** Comment section or term paper - if you'd like us to not assume that you're pulling stats out of your ass, then you should probably let us know where you got the information. Don't assume that your facts are well known.
I was a very young girl, 8th grade, when I heard from the media that there's a gender wage gap. I immediately went to the most intelligent woman in my life, my mother, a college professor. I asked her if she was ever paid less monthly salary than any of her male counterparts. Her answer was a surprised no. Because that would be illegal. All of her male and female colleagues received the same salary. She was an associate professor at that time so her salary was obviously less than the head of the department, who happened to be a man. But after 5 years when my mom became the head of the department, she was actually being paid equivalent to her predecessor (technically higher because of inflation because the salaries of all the jobs had gone up in this time).
Because it didn’t happen to your mother (which awesome for her btw) it must not happen to anyone. That’s a great logic, because I have never been kicked in the nuts it must mean it has never happened to anyone. So I’ll just go around “not possibly kicking” misogynistic bosses who “can’t possibly pay a woman less” on the nuts.
@R G 1. Its hard to take you seriously and congratulate you on your "logic" when you immediately threaten someone cause they disagreed with you. 2. Wasnt there a piece on how something was wrong with the ERA?
R G they do. All the industries associated with women (secretarial work, teachers, nurses, housecleaners, waitresses etc)were not magically bestowed on society for women or coincidentally optimal for the personality traits and abilities of all women (or at least the percentage of women who occupy those professions). There were actual campaigns to do as you say “save money” by hiring exclusively women because, drumroll, they could get away with paying them less.
I've seen far too many sources debunking the wage gap (at least in terms of 'less pay for the same work') and yet I can't seem to find any actual cases where an employer is actively discriminating against women in this way. Feminists talking about this never even attempt to quote a single example of this (illegal, by the way) activity being done. So at the end of the day, they've turned an issue that's entirely down to individual women's choices (whether influenced by men or not) into an issue that's about discrimination.
Peregrine Justice Enger you do understand that there are no evidence whatsoever in that article that support suck claim. the only one actual evidence are the TOTAL wages of men and women. Those are all the wages of men vs all the wages of women in the US. It doesnt account for the fact that most of the highest paying jobs are occupied by men... It's like saying why r 10 people working as school teachers r earning less than 10 people working at wallstreet...
that doesn't make it acceptable to say that the wag gap A: doesn't exist and B: isnt sexist . the reason so many men have high paying jobs is because the work system is based off of men and the fact women have only recent;y began actually taking jobs (thousands of years>1970+). its broken in other words,and it needs fixing. don't over simplify,
Peregrine Justice Enger wtf? it's the men's fault women choose different type of jobs?? to answer you. (A) it is acceptable to say there is not a wage gap bc women and men are paid the same salaries for the exact same job (as long they are the same hours) and (B) it isn't sexist that women usually choose other lines of work than men do. It just is. Let me tell u something else. It is a fact that more women enter the university than men. Does that make the universities (or even the women who enter the universities) sexist towards men? NO BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR CHOICE!
Anastasis K I didnt say it was mens fault women "chose" different jobs, I said the job market and jobs in general that pay more than "women jobs" (teaching, personal support etc) are based of of men and how they can work longer than women. also its been proven that the wage gap exits its a lot smaller when you count out subliminal pushes and open sexist discrimination, but it still exists. the wage gap isnt just guys in big offices telling women they cant get paid as much. its complicated. if you actualy want to hear why ill happily explain it.
Women should obviously be paid the same amount as men for doing the same job. But this will not remove the wage gap entirely. When calculating the male and female average wages, things like working hours and pregnancy leave do affect the numbers. While it's not the women's fault that they can get pregnant, it's not the men's fault either. We have to acknowledge that humans are a sexually dimorphic species.
"While it's not the women's fault that they can get pregnant, it's not the men's fault either." Pretty sure a man and a woman are involved in most pregnancies. If maternity leave was the same for both (guilty) parties, some of the wage discrimination might disappear. Of course, that could be a disincentive to having children...
nimrodery We don't have to waste time rigging the game to make sure men and women live the exact same lives. Let people make their own choices because what they really want is the freedom to do so. The activist will play these mind games to no end until we tell them we've had enough. The pursuit of equality isn't about giving feminist a permanent job to micro managing all of our lives.
edtastic It's not about living the exact same life, it's about men and women assuming equal responsibility in raising children. Is it okay that it's a woman's unpaid "job" to raise children while the "breadwinner" is free to make money? Shouldn't responsibility be shared equally considering it takes both genders to produce children? Why should employers even hire women, when they will inevitably have to lose them to maternity leave? Change a few diapers while making dinner and cleaning the house, then I'll be able to hear what you're saying about "micromanaging."
***** they just want to get a cheer from the audience. it's sad seeing obvious holes in john oliver's/jon stewart's arguments because it starts feeling like even supposed political rhetoric is propaganda.
@@m.m2594 Yes they are. The joke is saying "I am making a company and only hire women to save money" as the person who made this comment thread said. But the first commenter did not get that, so I told him that it was a joke.
There are not examples, all he mentions is a study, and some unrelated statistics. The comment section is actually filled with alot more realistic arguments.
***** I can say, "a study was performed recently that proves unicorns exist" you need the actual documentation, the environment it was performed in, and the basis for the test, The statistic he mentioned (77 cents to a dollar) was not even attributed to the right comparison. He is wrong, John should have checked this shit before he spouted this feminist rhetoric that has no place in the debate scene.
Mr. Man Lightnin Theres more than one study that does show that women earn less in the workplace. what about the university experiment mentioned in the piece? Also "Feminist Rhetoric"....oooh those scary women are coming to get you! like seriously, what you think people just made this up? why? what would be the point?
You can't talk wage equality until you force companies to publish wages, which they will lobby hard against because they like to use differential pricing when they hire, keeping employees in the dark about how much their work is actually worth.
I have to disagree with John on this one. If women made 83cents for every dollar men make then businesses would hire only women and save 17% on labour costs. Chinese workers make significantly less than north american workers that why most manufactures moved their.
Matheus Torres It's as fact as "fact" that women are prime victims of domestic violence (it's ~50/50 FYI). It's bullshit hysteria to attract more funding for women "issues" and to get more dimwits to vote for whoever claims to know how to fix it.
lifebarier LOL, what's the source for your 50/50, or is it just from your imagination? How often do you read news about men getting beaten up or killed by their girlfriends/wives? Certainly much less than the opposite.
I'm sure there's women in manager and pay choice positions to encourage equality. At the same time, television productions only have so many employees, some of which are making minimum wage and others thousands of dollars per hour. It'd be a small sample size with high variation, it's not really a scenario in which discrimination would make much calculable difference. The margin of error is too huge.
@@emhu2594 yeah they do, actually some women (some men do too, just to a lower extent) make more because they're attractive and they'll drive viewership up
I laughed so hard at your comment I woke up my wife, that earns more than me, and she kicked me out of the room to go sleep on the couch where all my electronic toys are. It was worth it. Now im watching 'Friends' on Netflix. Win/Win
I have liked Last Week Tonight up to this point, but the amount of fallacies in this video have made me question John's previous videos. I don't know what he is trying to accomplish or what his opinion on what to do to solve the nonexistent pay gap, but this is disappointing.
***** Nobody is denying that women on average make less than men on average. The difference is intelligent people can look at the reasons why that is the case and find they make a lot of sense. Reactionary people see those numbers and immediately assume there is some kind of societal conspiracy afoot.
Ok, well what are the numbers then? I'm pretty facinated, seeing as you must be an expert in this field to be so confident in the falsities. What institute do you study for?
So I'm an educated man just out of college living in an urban area. On average women make 8 percent more than I for doing the same job. Where is the outrage? Hell where is even the recognition?
Me too! Like how single, childless women under 44 are earning 8% more then men! I'm all of those things, but male. But of course according to John, this is still somehow my fault.
@@Reggie2000 I know they do a lot of biased content, but this ep is actually really grounded and is one of the only place that I've seen really discuss the real causes of wage gaps.
The fact that people in the comments have further understanding of this and aren’t just following the shows argument, says some really positive stuff about the normal viewers
i'm honestly surprised to see this too. many of john oliver's videos are terribly supported like this one, but ppl will easily jump on it as the right take because john oliver speaks with strong conviction, and the humorous effect makes the surface of his arguments more compelling but it usually lacks depth or insight.
The Number came from a Study, comparing the Salray of ALL Men vs. The salary of ALL Woman. It dosnt account for Experience, Education, regions or even Different Jobs
@@brunobastos5533 But these Jobs actually pay Bad. But nobody does Taalk about that 90% of Suicides are Male, 70% of Ho eless People are Male, 95% of Battlefield Fatallities are Male and 80% Workplace Fatallities are Male. But they get Angry at a Disproven and Old Number.
@@brunobastos5533 If People would Acknowledge the Fact that there are Differneces between men and Woman, if they are in The Interests or Biological factors, it would be easuer, but no. Men and Woman are exactly the same.
my only question is, if businesses can get away with paying women less... why are they not looking for women workers instead of men?. people higher illegals because of that reason, even if they don't like them
Companies aren't simply offering women lower wages, that statistic is too general and very often misinterpreted. And if companies are required to increase women's wages, they will simply start hiring men.
Another question is: If there's such a wage gap, why aren't we hearing about class action lawsuits running rampant, of women everywhere suing their employers for discrimination?
OK, so what I think he's saying is that there is a preconception by men (patriarchy) that men do a better job so they are able to negotiate higher wages because of that. But if men are so prejudiced, why don't women create the next Uber, Google or Apple and higher only women, which are cheaper then? I mean, we live in free market capitalism. Just come up with a great product, and hire whomever you want.
It's actually pretty simple - post the salary or wage for the positions you're hiring for. Make it apply across the board. Wage negotiations at the hiring interval are generally unpleasant for both parties anyway, and it will simplify matters for hiring in general.
It's not that simple at all. There can be candidates that the employer realllyyy likes and there can be candidates the employer kind of likes or is "good enough". So depending on how strongly someone is qualified for the position, the salary is going to vary. Even pro-athletes within the same league can make a few millions of dollars to 10s of millions depending on unique their skillset and expertise is. That's why it's important to negotiate salary once the employer reviews the candidate based on resume and interview performance because it's truly depends case by case basis on this. Even within the same company, I saw that interns were making 30/hr and another making 45/hr because one works in a better funded org since that org brings in more revenue for the company.
Yeah, just echoing BRBallin1's comment. You absolutely _should_ pay experienced workers with great technical + soft skills more. Money is (or at least should be) a mirror of value added to a system, and you can get a rough sense of that value early in the interviewing process. A company would be forced to either (a) lose good talent to other companies who posted a higher starting salary or (b) overpay less qualified employees who simply aren't contributing enough value to the company to offset their compensation. Both scenarios end up hurting the company, potentially fatally (especially for smaller businesses), which hurts _everyone's_ paychecks. > Wage negotiations at the hiring interval are generally unpleasant for both parties anyway At first they definitely can be. Practice -- take every job interview you can, including a couple/few for jobs you aren't interested in (you can use those to try new approaches you usually might not try). Be confident in the value you contribute. Look at your work history with a couple friends who can help point out areas you might be too modest to acknowledge as going above and beyond the call of duty. From your comment, I'd wager you enjoy on some level problem solving and making the workplace better -- use that. Go out of your way to learn and invest in your expertise, and then use that to find creative, novel solutions to obstacles at work. Super brownie points if you talk to people about the obstacles _they're_ facing (which is in itself value added just by making people feel heard) and do the same for them. Make it impossible for people to not recognize the value you contribute, including yourself, and negotiating raises or starting salaries will come much more naturally.
Absolutely not, you wouldn’t run a business that way either. My boss offered me an hourly wage for my job that my coworkers (in this case women) had accepted but I was unwilling to accept. I make at least 10% more than they did, only, because I asked and didn’t accept. Some women would do the same as I did, most would not. #wagegap
@@AdamLovesHorror People shouldn't have to ask for higher wages. We don't want to teach people to humbly know and stand up for their value, acknowledging that different hormones make this harder for some people. That'd be crazy. Companies should just pay everyone the same fair wage. If you ask for a better wage than your colleagues are getting, then you're just an arrogant piece of crap who thinks you're better than everyone else. And probably sexist.
@@dismalthoughts wow that’s a lot of name calling and assumptions on your part. Let me take the biological sex out of the equation by making them both males in this case so no different. Both workers do the same job BUT very in any workforce do those two do their job in the exact same way. Likely one does it faster, cleaner, receives more compliments or criticisms. Why should they make the same simply because they do the same job? If you own the company and are hiring me but I’m only available 2 days a week, but my counterpart is available night or day, 7 days a week, that person doing the same job as I would be more valuable. Those who have more value to the company would be paid more. If you still disagree with me, that is absolutely fine. I’m no sexist, I consider myself a feminist actually, but maybe not how you would define me. Have a wonderful day and thanks for telling me your side of it.
*The wage gap is simply the average earnings of men and women working full time. It does not count for different job positions, hours worked, or different jobs. It has nothing to do with the same job. It has nothing to do with discrimination.*
I'm looking for a woman who has had a job where she got paid less than her male coworkers or a man who has had a job where he got paid more than his female coworkers. So far I have not been able to find any. Please tell me if you are such a person.
+Keyser Soze No, discrimination is illegal, if you are the victim of it you have the option to go to the police, if you don't, you have nothing to complain about.
+Keyser Soze The only difference one makes in pay is attributed to their negotiating of salaries, additional training that may cause them to be a more valuable asset to the business (such as a teacher having a doctorate instead of a bachelors) and in no way, shape or form is directly affected by color of the employee's skin, their sex, sexual orientation (ect) If someone is paid less specifically because of these reasons, that is grounds for a lawsuit. If it just so happens that men more aggressively negotiate salaries than women or, on average have more qualifications for the job this is not discrimination, this is a meritocracy at work.
+Keyser Soze Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself. Only the hard core liberals echo the bullshit narrative that women are being paid less just because they're women. A quick Google search will quickly dissolve the illusions and lies that these feminist liars perpetuate. Do your research, or go back to your echo chamber. Just don't drag your bullshit accusations out into reality or you're going to have a rude awakening.
wow this changes what I thought. before when I heard women made $0.77 to the dollar a man makes I assumed that that was for the same job. I thought hey that's bad and how is that still a thing? now I know women get about equal pay for equal work (aka same position and level of experience) and that statistic is just comparing all jobs when on average men are employed longer and in higher paying professions. all this talk of inequality is now obviously BS.
Yes I did and then I did some more research. the misleading $0.77 on the dollar stat comes from comparing all jobs. when you compare equal work (same job and experience level) women actually get equal pay. Yes you can find some people who are sexist but that's not what the workplace as a whole is like. A lot of people just like misleading people and others like to think of themselves as victims, sad really.
seems you are one of the people who love to play the victim and select the information you intake. the fact is that as a whole the U.S. job market pays equal wages for equal work (when comparing the same job and level of experience). yes there have been sexist people but they don't represent the norm however you can cherry pick them if you want to whine about a non existent issue. women being paid less than men (for the same job) is a myth, that's just a fact. The difference in pay comes from differing jobs and experience, men tend to stay in the work force longer. as for women being on average in lower paying professions, that's their choice. they have an equal opportunity. When it comes down to it women are paid equal wages for equal work, that is when you define equal work as the same job and level of experience, so sayeth the facts. go whine somewhere else
That would be sexist and wrong, if it were true. The statistics like women earn $0.77 for the mans $1 are comparing the average wages of all men and women. To get a better understanding of how equality is nowadays you need to compare men vs women's pay in the SAME job and experience level, not the average for all men vs women. The statistics for women being hired for the same position with the same level of experience is that they are given the same pay. Like I said before, women tend towards lower paying professions (for example nurses while a majority of doctors are men). Men also stay in the workforce longer thus get a higher salary for experience. This is why women earn $0.77 on average, it is because some people like to play victim and others like to score points with demographics by giving misleading information. now that you have been informed, again, I won't read your reply as you have demonstrated either an inability to intake new information or you're trolling. good night.
Lilith Geisler this study by the US Dept. of Labor might be of interest. www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf "Statistical analysis that includes variables has produced results that collectively account for an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent."
Lilith Geisler problem is, if you make your case for equality (which is obviously a thing that needs to be acted upon and brought about) on a completely false statistic, the waters are muddied and it's a lot harder to make any headway for equality. there are so many REAL reasons to fight for equality, but basing it all around the wage gap myth is going to turn people against you and you're going to have a MUCH harder fight because you're basing your arguments on misinformation.
I remember an argument regarding wage gap... Men get paid more because they choose higher-paying jobs, e.g. doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc. Meanwhile, women choose jobs like female doctor, female lawyer, female engineer, etc.
here John Oliver got on the "go with emotions not truth" train that appeals so much to women, which doesn't say a lot about him... there are more male workers with higher payed jobs than female and that's THE TRUTH! If there's a problem, it is that women don't pursue dangerous and other high-salary jobs, and I as a well payed 25 years old male IT specialist don't give a fuck about and won't take any whining whatsoever! From 12 workers in our company, 2 are female - one is a designer and the other is an accounting. When I studied in an IT academy couple of years ago, the female students were about 15 to 20 percent of all students... but instead of looking at things objectively, let's overreact and completely ignore facts...
Study just came out by the OECD which agreed that the reasons for the pay gap are because there are more male workers with higher paid jobs than female, and also showed evidence that the reason for that is because those higher paid jobs are both more hostile toward recruiting women and that girls have less confidence in themselves to be able to do those jobs (evidenced by their having less confidence when it comes to the more scientific school subjects such as maths). So ... there's some facts. That male workers having higher paid jobs is not in dispute (from here, anyway). Why that's the case, however, is.
On the confidence - A lot of PEOPLE have/had problems with confidence in themselves, that's not a gender issue On the hostility - I need to see the study before making any comments. On the study - citation needed :)
Herowar It came out from the OECD last week. Highly publicised, a google search on them will show it up for you. It shows a much higher proportion of girls have confidence issues in regards to maths, sciences and engineering than boys. Which is where it becomes a gender issue.
***** We already have enough evidence that men and women are treated differently when it comes to STEM subjects. Maths and science are male-dominated industries, and the public perception and stereotypes of some subjects is that they're "boy" subjects (e.g. computer science, maths, physics, etc). There's not been any research to suggest that girls biologically are not as good as boys in those subjects, so unless that changes ... the only logical conclusion is that the confidence levels are down to those social stereotypes and perceptions. The burden of proof is on you to give some biological evidence, if you're going to claim that there's a biological reason for it. You can't just claim that men and women have different brains and that's why there's this difference without any biological basis for it ... that's far less scientific.
***** If you want me to provide evidence, that's extremely easy. There's plenty of scientific studies that the undertake of STEM is down to gender stereotypes. There is science which points that direction very heavily. www8.gsb.columbia.edu/newsroom/newsn/2700/new-research-proves-gender-bias-extraordinarily-prevalent-in-stem-careers blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/ www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/08/new-study-finds-men-more-likely-doubt-evidence-gender-bias-science-fields So, so many studies have said "this social bias exists", whereas I haven't seen ANY science to suggest that there's a biological reason for it. The burden of proof is on you to provide that evidence of a biological imperative.
My issue isn't wage gap, but rather people trying to sway things. I love computers. I want to be a computer programmer. However, I have been told I physically cannot handle the job by a woman who came in to talk about college options. I hate that the guys in my computer class look at me like an object. That's what really bothers me.
Women are favored for STEM jobs. women are given better grades in school despite men doing better on objective things like taking a math test. women got equal rights in spite of being different and are given special rights or double standards too. self employed women earn less, but when hired, they actually are paid more FOR THE SAME JOB than men are, but the pay gap exists due to biology and personal choices (EARNING less for DIFFERENT work is not sexist). I'd give details/evidence but that's probably a waste. click the sub/bell icons on channel Playitalready for a future vid on this.
@@ethandeister6567 uh because they choose different occupations. You can’t look at Scandinavia for example they have the most egalitarian society in the world and yet women outnumber men in nursing and teaching at a ratio of about 10:1 while men outnumber women in the stem fields at about the same ratio. Maybe your social conditioning has made you forget that we’re animalistic creatures with natural inclinations towards our male/female roles. I appreciate you having a civilized conversation but please look into the differences between the interests of the 2 genders rather than blaming it on a sexiest society. If anything the laws and justice system are more sexist towards men than women ie men serve 60% longer sentences for the same crime as a woman or that men only get joint custody of their children 10% of the time
It’s hilarious that a show that dedicated in part, a portion of an episode to P-Hacking and misrepresenting statistics, would then misrepresent statistics.
OK, that's fair, I will accept the "John vs Jennifer" study with only a 127 applicant sample study if you can explain why women are preferred 2 to 1 in STEM with a 873 sample study with the same "exact application" variable the "John vs Jennifer" study used. I'll wait... www. pnas. org/content/112/17/5360.full. pdf
Yep, I'm currently studying computer science and recently had a girl tell me how much she will be disadvantaged and underpaid, I'm like: "Nope, you'll actually be offered more money and be twice as likely to be hired as I'll be."- she immediately exclaims: "Well not if your boss is a man!" It's fucking unreal, she's gonna make bank no problem and right now she also still has the looks to get a guy to take care of her if she wants to, and she still gets to tell her horror stories about the evil man taking her rights. I'd swap with her any day. I think Icould manage the extra tampon costs.
Pretty much. And then, no joke, during the next day, someone came to us during a maths course and told us about how "underrepresented" women are in stem, telling the girls to apply for a female only scholarship they have to do nothing for, so now she is actually getting payed 300€ vagina bonus a month. True story.
Because as we all know, sample size is the only variable that matters in a study. Methodology and data analysis have never made a study less reliable than another!
Once again, Oliver nails it. And I'd advise anyone with an aversion to being disgusted to avoid the comment sections. It appears as though those dreadful MRAs (read: mysognists) are out in full force.
ZDProletariat I would define misogyny as someone who holds a certain prejudice towards women, and often that prejudice erupts into animosity, oppression, or even violence. MRA-ism developed as prejudicial instinctive knee-jerk reaction to what its constituents believed were threats to "traditional gender roles," meaning that they wanted to maintain their power while holding women down - which amounts to oppression. The overlap between the two groups is so significant that any perceived distinctions are blurry and arbitrary at best. And for the record (if you're bothering to read this far), I do not instinctively dismiss anyone who "simply disagrees" with me. I consider myself to be fairly open-minded and welcoming of dialectism. Butttttt, when one starts generalising races, genders, and other minority groups negatively because of some inherent biological characteristic/trait - I will assume that they're bigoted. Which seems to me to be a rather accurate and restrained way of putting it, ffs. You will not sway my stance unless you bring me a logical, coherent, and non-bigoted argument that clearly illustrates why I'm wrong. Until then, good day.
ZDProletariat *Sigh* Yeah, I meant a "misogynist" and not "misogyny." Kudos, champ, for harping on an insignificant typo. And as far as the sexism/misogyny goes, I would put it like this - not every sexist is a misogynist, but every misogynist is a sexist. Sexism can include both misandry (not that it's a huge problem) and misogyny, but it's not women-specific. And within the sub-category of misogyny, the prejudices/discriminations are included - but only in the sense that they are directed towards women. I haven't got a clue why you want to omit that from misogyny and solely attribute it to sexism, when one is a variant of the other. Okay, on the "most relevant point," exactly why are MRAs not misogynists? Men have had more power than women for, um, the KNOWN HISTORY OF TIME. What rights are they actively seeking? Don't they have them all already? The answer, I feel, is as I previously stated - they feel threatened by the advent of gender equality, and they seek to solidify their male privilege though oppression - which is, more or less, an aversion to equality. MRA-ism has evolved to using acts of misogyny to achieve and justify (to themselves) their goals. Do you want me to define "traditional gender roles?" Feminism and The Women's Rights Movement have begun to erode men's grip on power through demanding equality by eliminating the wage gap, seeking positions of authority, diversify influence, fighting for autonomy over their own bodies, ending sexual assault and harassment, and much more. And with women beginning to penetrate men's stronghold on power, many men are feeling threatened by what they thought was entitled to them because of male privilege. This is, more or less, how MRA-ism was born. The faulty logic that for equality to occur, something must be taken away from them, is prevalent among their ranks. We do not, on average, share the same gender roles as we had 50 years ago. Men were the ones who worked, and women were expected to stay at home or work lesser jobs for less money. Now, while imperfect and still unequal, the ratio is beginning to shift towards equality with more women holding positions of power and being the major breadwinners for their respective households. Still, women are being oppressed by being denied equal pay for equal jobs, workplace discrimination, sexual harassment, and the threat of losing their control over their own bodies. And on your third point, perhaps you should explain to me how the ideals of these "current" MRA groups differ from the norm while adhering to equality. Are these some sort of enlightened groups of people who are really just feminists while ironically calling themselves MRAs? I don't get it. By the definition of their group, they're calling for Men's Rights - so what are these rights? The right to wear a bra? Have fun with that. The right to have a period? Congrats on your newly discovered masochism. The right to make less money than your female counterparts? FedEx me your paycheck and I'll make the necessary adjustments. The right to have the opposite gender tell you what to do with your body? Hire a dominatrix. The right to live under the constant fear of rape? I encourage you to visit your nearest penitentiary. The right to have all of your accomplishments to be dismissed and instead be regarded solely as an object of sexual desire? I can only help you with the former. What rights are men, as a whole, being deprived of that women are allowed to enjoy? And I think you fully understood my point about generalisations, but I'll elaborate because I'm a sucker for trolls. Yes, they can have validity for scientific studies, buttttt when one starts to make baseless claims about a group of people based on a collective biological trait - I call foul. Examples: women give birth so they must be stay-at-home mothers, she wore a revealing outfit so she was asking for rape, women aren't as physically strong as men so they shouldn't hold positions of power, etc. Basically, any argument that decries women as lesser as men and subsequently asserts that they deserve less because of it. On the subject of bigotry, a bigot must first decide what to be bigoted about. The identity of the subject is their "evidence," and the baseless prejudice is where the false generalisation of bigotry occurs. Example: I don't like (insert identity) people because of their blah, blah, blah, baseless prejudice. As for me, yeah, I judge bigots. But it's not a prejudice because I'm judging them for their bigotry. It's my "informed" decision to not like bigots because of their bigotry. Prove to me that MRAs aren't bigots and I will stop judging them as bigots. But I don't think you can.
ZDProletariat Alright, boss, I see you've left me here with the beginnings of a novel. I'm afraid I have neither the patience nor the endurance at this late hour to offer a point-by-point rebuttal, and I doubt it would persuade you otherwise - much like your message (which I did read thoroughly) failed to persuade me. Furthermore, I found it interesting how one can use the term "logical fallacy" that often and still manage to prolifically saturate their own arguments with them. Were this a philosophical debate, I might be interested in continuing it, but it's about social equality - and I'm quite firm with my position on that. I will, however, share with you an article that addresses several of your points, and hopefully this will serve as a suitable conclusion to our whole pseudo-intellectual bout of blathering: time.com/134152/the-toxic-appeal-of-the-mens-rights-movement/ Good day.
But that's no reason to avoid the comments. That a reason to go in and put positive comments that help other rational (read: non-MRA) people feel welcome.
They had one example that was anecdotal... hardly a legitimate basis for ignoring all the evidence that they, surprisingly, acknowledged existed. Though they did gloss over what the 77-83 cent on the dollar number came from. There is a difference between wage and earnings... that 83 cent gap is not a representation for unequal wage... it represent unequal earnings, which, as they mentioned and dismissed, is a result of life choices... which include more than maternity leave, such as, choosing to work less overtime, choosing to work less hours a week, choosing to take more time off... those are all choices women are making even when they don't choose to have children. And none of those choices are wrong, or bad... they just have different priorities and thus make different life choices. But the point is, it is irrational to fabricate an issue of a patriarchal system negatively discriminating against women... when *_women_* are the cause of the difference in earnings... from their own choices, resulting from their own priorities and free will.
Ikr? It's already illegal to pay women less and men more for the same work. Not only that, but if women were making so much less than men, than why hire so many men? Other than a few here and there as posterboys, why hire men when it's so much cheaper to just hire women?
SteelHime Since when does discrimination follow logic? Imagine where himanity'd be if women were allowed to join the workplace centuries ago. Wouldn't there be a massive monetary benefit to that? But that's not how that works, now does it?
hey i ll take a pay cut and gladly give 15 cents per dollar if i can have an extra 8 yrs of life.. woman forget that. just ask a woman if she would like to die 8 yrs before her time.. ok so they have babies. we die earlier.. its called life get over it..
I can't believe the backlash this video has gotten in the comments- everyone talks about race and how there should be equal opportunity yet cant see why genders should be of the same standard - both are important issues and it's disgraceful that it is still a problem within our society
The video received backlash because of its flawed methodology. Women statistically work less hours, take lower paying jobs and make up less of the national workforce, so ofcourse its going to *look* like women overall make 0.77/$1.00 compared to men, but thats not discrimination, thats a study that doesnt factor in reality. In a nutshell, theres nothing to fix, and ironically 'fixing' it means screwing over men..
The difference between racial issues such as Ferguson and this one is that if a white woman were to be treated in the same way black men (or even black women) such as michael brown, the blacklash and hysteria against the cops would be insurmountable. When its black people though, it's business as usual. Black people and other minorities are struggling to GET IN the employment system, whereas white women are trying to get paid more when their already in, there's a disparity between the two. A recent study showed that white women benefit the most from affirmative actio, funny how that works
Meh, this has always been a bit of a "stay out of this discussion or face stupid consequences" topic for me. There is not really a 100% right way to look at this. Both sides have some arguments that are true and both sides say lots of stuff that is horribly wrong. Even John Oliver's video is stupidly biased. Should women be paid the same? Yes, of course. Is it their and/or societies fault that they are not? Maybe, who knows? Can we even change things so women get paid 100% the same as long as there are lots of braindead morons out there who get to decide over your paycheck? You know these cars, that can drive over a lake as long as they do it at a stupidly high speed, right? This discussion is a bit like driving one of these cars right towards a giant wall over a shark infested lake. You could either slow down or keep going, but whatever you do, the choice you make is most certainly not 100% the right one.
The time will come, very very soon (when robots do all the truly nasty stuff for us,) when the pendulum will swing the other way and women are payed more than men. And it will be for completely uncontrollable reasons. Wonder what the outcry will sound like then?
No one ever said it was womens fault they get paid less? All that was said was that since women take time out of their careers to raise kids they tend to pick career paths that allow that and that leads to lower pay due to either career choice or less time spent in field. You arent going to offer someone more money who has less to bring to the table. The only thing credible was the study of 2 identical resume's with different names. Would be more credible if they asked for reasoning why the pay was different.
E. David Healthcare would affect both, maternity leave still hinders them as it still reduces experience, as well as makes women unfavorable to hire because of potential future cost. Only reasonable thing pointed out is hiring and promoting bias, which would need to be proved on an individual case basis anyway.
E. David The unintended pregnancy and gender bias in hiring and promotions accounts for such a small percent of women I dont think it is really relevant. Personally my mom used to be an assistant principal, but stepped down to be a teacher so she could raise a family and no longer had time for her carrer. Im sure it is just like that with most women.
Don't want to spam this too much, but - yes, women are 100% the reason why they get paid what they get paid. And I'm a woman. 4thwavers.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/the-wage-gap-myth-explained/
$15 an hour, now we don't need to go to college or get careers. Highschool drop outs, can now make MORE money than most college grads and not be in debt!!! This is amazing. This is how America should be. We should be able to make as much money as the next rich bastard without having to be enslaved by college fees!
That's stupid. You *do* realize that employers don't have to pay women when they take maternity leave, right? Men are also allowed to take paternity leave under FMLA, so your argument doesn't hold water. If men are denied their right to FMLA leave, they are permitted to sue, just as women are. Do you even know what FMLA is?
Twinpact Please present evidence that what you say is true. Last night I searched for gender disparity in numbers of people who took leave, and I couldn't find what I was looking for...so please...prove to me that women take FMLA leave more than men do. P.S.-- FMLA leave also applies to those who are taking care of family members...it's not just for those who are pushing out babies, or for those who are ailing. This year, I took 2 months leave in order to take care of my dad while he was dying. I don't consider it a shortcoming on my part, and I was not paid for the time I was on leave. I was a woman taking leave...but I was taking care of a man. So how does that stack up?
Cameron Hooper Beta outlier...Ah, he must be talking about the fish. The stereotype that most people own goldfish means that people who own Betas are the outliers. Betas are very pretty fishies. No, but seriously, despite these posters attempts at "argument" and "logic" your observation is one of the few statements that isn't trolling or rude or based in Dark Ages definitions of "women". I'm tired of going through these and reporting these idiots...then again, I'm in the TH-cam comment section, so methinks I am the biggest idiot here. I'm done with this thread. I'm out. Thank you for being a normal and rational human being. Don't ever change. :)
It's depressing and sad that one the best research teams in journalism couldn't google for 15 and see through this false stat. Oliver is too afraid to challenge his audience on this one.
NOT THIS DUMB SHIT AGAIN. The Pay gap has been disproven they don’t take out Over time hours which men tend to do more off so when you account for that it equals $1 to $1. Oh ya and a new recent study by Yale and Harvard both had evidence to prove it didnt exist.
Sheesh, all those people giving reasonable explanations about the gender pay gap. So what if men and women with similar qualifications and experience get the same pay? Lets pretend they don't and base a comedy sketch around that.
Haaa aakk it’s not, here YOU go amp.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/nov/08/dispelling-the-myths-why-the-gender-pay-gap-does-not-reflect-the-choices-women-make
I was reading some of the comments and I'm so glad that I'm not an American.. some of you are bashing feminist but yet do you even know what it means? It's the believe that everyone should be treated equal. Of course, there is the extremist that believe women deserve more that man. However, no matter what your talking about there will always be those people. We just need to learn to accept people for who they are (race, gender, sexuality, faith). Like get over your selves..
***** Feminism is about equality, but speaking from the perspective of a woman who does not receive it. It is talking specifically about women's issues that have not yet met the same freedoms as men's. In order to work on things, we need to specify what they are with terminology.
ZDProletariat If you have questions, seek academic sources. If you can spend hours ranting on here then I'm sure you're more than capable of doing it. Especially since you are not willing to listen to anyone here, including John Oliver and his team. You need to learn to do proper research, and to gain perspective. Stop relying on anecdotal evidence.
Where exactly are the sources to where John got this information? 1:26 - There are still many variables to take into account for this,job position, how long they have worked there, lifestyle choices, etc. 2:12 - The gender wage gap has been repeatedly debunked. A study entitled "Graduating to a Pay Gap" by the (AAWU) American Association of University Women (a group that fights for equality for women) even stated that the true percentage of the wage gap shrinks to 7% on page 21 of their report. Why exactly would John Oliver even disagree to a group that is for equality for women. 2:42 - What about "The Equal Pay Act of 1963" signed by John F. Kennedy while the AAWU were there? 2:53 - We are not blaming women. Women have equality for opportunities just as men. Every action that anybody takes has consequences. If women want to work in a cubicle from 9 to 5 and have their husbands play around in the sunshine with their kids just so they can collect a paycheck then that is fine by me. Just don't complain when you've made that choice. 4:11 - "More favorably". Females have taken the majority of positions when it comes to education. There are only 16% of elementary male teachers. Why is there an uproar when women are not getting into STEM fields and not when men are in social service jobs? 4:50 - The same applies to men. Plus women are less likely to negotiate for promotions and raises, explaining the 7% wage gap. This video was full of you asking questions, John. So I have a question for you, "if women were being paid 23% less then men then why don't companies just hire women?"
It is AGAINST the law for a person to be paid more than another person for the exact same job based on gender, race, sexual orientation or religion! If a man works in an office and has the same position as a woman but gets paid more than her, then it's against the law. THAT would then be a reason to go on a crusade. However, this "wage gap" is based on ALL women and ALL men in ALL jobs in the ENTIRE country. Then yes, there is a difference. That difference is quantifiable. Claiming that women should be paid more for having different lower paying jobs than men is just stupid. However, a woman raising a child is different from a woman going off from work for a couple of months to recuperate from giving birth. Those who take maternity leave should be getting full salary for their time away. That is all I would be willing to bend for. But a mother staying home for 10-18 years? How do you want to balance the "wage gap" if women stay at home? Do you want to give them checks in mail? Let me repeat: It is AGAINST the law for a person to be paid more than another person for the exact same job based on gender, race, sexual orientation or religion!
You're wrong about the sexual orientation part. One of the biggest reasons why ENDA (job and housing discrimination protection bill for the LGBT population) is failing the Congress is because a mistaken majority thinks that sexual orientation is protected and that passing ENDA would be redundant. Orientation is only protected in 21 states, DC, and a couple of cities and municipalities. Gender identity is only protected in 18 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. That's why the HRC's CEI index is so important - it is a compilation of companies that do protect LGBT workers, even if their states or cities don't.
Funny how in nearly every last week tonight episode, they chose to make a well defined argument and use facts to back it up. But in this one they chose to laugh at the people that look at the statistics in a way that makes sense. And almost everything he made fun of people for was a reasonable argument.
There is a difference between the "wage gap" & the "pay gap", one is basically illegal in almost every place on the planet, the other is determined by a no off factors (mostly 2 as discussed by some here)
I think there's a cultural problem. It's socially acceptable in business to pay women less and employers happily make use of the lack of consequences for saving a bit of money. I think women should unionize to get better deals on their employment.
lifebarier The way it works (or worked) is that if a woman is paid less, she has a certain time to address this and she can ask to get paid equal. So if a woman notices she's getting paid too little after she already works at a place for a while, she's fcked. For example if there's no males working the same job for the same amount of hours with the same experience and education, she can't compare and is fcked.
Darckense Onoda I think your example is bad. If there is no one to compare to , how does it count as getting discriminated against and getting fucked? Unless there is a formula of some sort , that companies must follow , when determining what the wage should be.People get paid what they are offered , as long as its higher or equal to minimum wage. So in the case of not having a coworker to compare to , a person is not discriminated against. That person simply chose a job with bad salary. And you can't compare people that are from different places of employment yet in same positions ,as they offer different salaries and employment benefits. And i'm not putting words in your mouth the last point is just for anyone else reading.
Dante Arhiwolf "If there is no one to compare to , how does it count as getting discriminated against" It would when later on a male person gets a same job with same credentials. But it's hard, it's hard to compare, since so many things like experience are calculated for. Why is experience calculated for, I have no clue. I am for equal pay for equal work. And you are right different work, (maybe) different pay.
well from the government point of view there is nothing else you can do, if they finished school and they are already doushbags who do this kind of thing, i can't think of anything else woman can do
I'm assuming it's because more woman stay home and take care of their children, yes even now, then men do. Generally men find jobs and woman will stay home with the kids if necessary. It also can depend on the certain job, for example I seem to see quite a bit more woman doing things like teaching and working at call centers.
Really disappointed in this video. He really has put out some quality stuff on other topics. Maybe he should stick to covering topics that wouldn't turn half of his viewer base on the other.
My comment is on the level of controversy generated. I do have a problem with unfair pay, but it has nothing to do with the video. The comment section does a pretty good job covering the reasons why there is a gap - perceived or otherwise.
Commentary is fine. What he did was pick a topic with enough controversy as to be compared to the struggle between atheists and theists. This doesn't make for comedy. It brings out the worst in people and it's simply not entertaining. If a person wants to be paid the same as me for the same job and can display the same level of competence, I would stand up for that person's right to ask for an equal wage. See what I did above? It doesn't require the use of sex/gender. When the language used to fight for good ideas is tainted by toxic, inflammatory verbiage, no progress is made - None. If I don't seem like I'm laughing, it's because I take freedom, equality, and responsibility very seriously. I know you don't which is why you're posting a counter-productive comment on a TH-cam video. But that's cool. I respect your right to express yourself. But don't confuse 'brittle egos' with 'this shit isn't funny... where'd the funny shit go?'
e nd i ve seen your comments and your default seems to be that its brittle fragile egos.other than that you dont make any argument.why dont you inspect what the detracters are saying and stop being so stuck up your self
Usually enjoy this show, but this segment was brazenly idiotic. I understand it's a comedy show, but when you ignore pertinent details, it kind of ruins your ability to make an argument. If a situation does exist, then you have to account for both sides of the issue when making an argument. Otherwise the side you're supposedly trying to convince is going to rightfully tune you out. In short, this segment made the show seem like a distorted mirror of Fox News.
I had a look at that "John and Jennifer" study and it is very dodgy. For example, at one point in the study, under the 'Materials and Methods' section it says "Indeed, we were particularly careful to obtain a sample representative of the underlying population, because many past studies have demonstrated that when this is the case, respondents and nonrespondents typically do not differ on demographic characteristics and responses to focal variables (47)." *Many past studies, respondents do not differ.* So essentially they kept taking the in different ways until it turned in the results they wanted. I'll just let that sink in.
I know, you're not going to listen to me, but: The list of White House staff and their wages are being reported to congress. You can read them online. Two women are listed as earning $0. Don't you think this might skew the average by a substantial margin? It doesn't say weather these two female staffers get their payment from another party, neither does it say how many hours every staffer works for the posted wage, or what their qualifications are. It is not enough to simply say, 'These women get less money.' You have to look at the kind of work and the hours. Women tend to choose careers that don't pay as much as working in a STEM field does. On average, they also work fewer hours than men in the same line of work do. It's not because they are dumb or lazy, but because they generally choose to have children.
I'm gonna be a little pedantic for a moment, because I'm like that, and tell you that the spelling in this situation is "whether," not "weather." You're talking meteorology, friend.
"Finally, a word about the infamous “wage gap,” which represents one of the most long-standing statistical fallacies in American policy debate. The 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure, or hours worked per week. When mainstream economists consider the wage gap, they find that pay disparities are almost entirely the result of women’s different life preferences-what men and women choose to study in school, where they work, and how they balance their home and career. A thorough 2009 study by the US Department of Labor examined more than fifty peer-reviewed papers on the subject and concluded that the wage gap “may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” 60 In addition to differences in education and training, the review found that women are more likely than men to leave the workforce to take care of children or older parents. There were so many differences in pay-related choices that the researchers were unable to specify even a residual effect that might be the result of discrimination. Wage-gap activists at the AAUW and the National Women’s Law Center say no-even when we control for relevant variables, women still earn less. But it always turns out that they have omitted one or two crucial variables. Consider the case of pharmacists. Almost half of all pharmacists are female, yet as a group, they earn only 85 percent of what their male counterparts earn. Why should that be? After all, male and female pharmacists are doing the same job with roughly identical educations. There must be some hidden discrimination at play. But according to the 2009 National Pharmacies Workforce Survey , male pharmacists work on average 2.4 hours more per week, have more job experience, and more of them own their own stores. 61 A 2012 New York Times article tells a similar story about women in medicine: “Female doctors are more likely to be pediatricians than higher-paid cardiologists. They are more likely to work part time. And even those working full time put in seven percent fewer hours a week than men. They are also much more likely to take extended leaves, most often to give birth and start a family.” 62 There are exceptions, but most workplace pay gaps and glass ceilings vanish when one accounts for these factors. And as economists frequently remind us, if it were really true that an employer could get away with paying Jill less than Jack for the same work, clever entrepreneurs would fire all their male employees, replace them with females, and enjoy a huge market advantage. Women’s groups do occasionally acknowledge that the pay gap is largely explained by women’s life choices, as the AAUW does in its 2007 Behind the Pay Gap. 63 But this admission is qualified: they insist that women’s choices are not truly free. Women who decide, say, to stay home with children, to become pediatricians rather than cardiologists, or to attend the Fashion Industry High School rather than Aviation High are driven by sexist stereotypes. Says the AAUW, “Women’s personal choices are . . . fraught with inequities.” 64 It speaks of women being “pigeonholed” into “pink-collar” jobs in health and education. According to the National Organization for Women, powerful sexist stereotypes “steer” women and men “toward different education, training, career paths,” and family roles. 65 But is it really sexist stereotypes and social conditioning that best explain women’s vocational preferences and their special attachment to children? Aren’t most American women free and self-determining human beings? The women’s groups need to show -not dogmatically assert-that women’s choices are not free. And they need to explain why, by contrast, the life choices they promote are the authentic ones-what women truly want, and what will make them happier and more fulfilled. Of course, these are weighty philosophical questions unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. But surely, one thing should be clear: ignoring boys’ educational deficits is not the solution to the wage and power gap. And whatever women’s problems may be, they should not blind us to the growing plight of marginally educated men." - Christina Hoff Sommers. The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies Are Harming Our Young Men.
Dear John, Why did you abandon the skepticism you advocated regarding scientific studies and only consider the statistics that confirm your preconceptions? You can work harder, dig a little deeper AND still be entertaining and funny. You have done numerous times and I wish you stay the course. Kind regards
If you could pay Jennifer $4000 less for the same job, why isn't the workforce flooded with women? And being a woman with children usually dose have a larger impact on your career than if you are a guy with children. Because you have to take a few months off for maternity leave, recovery, nursing, maybe taking care of the baby, eyc. You don't get to 'choose' if you are the only gender that has to get pregnant, but it's a fact, and nobody is saying you HAVE to have children, it's your choice, but if you make that choice, it will affect you. not because there is male oppression in the work force, but because of your own choices
I mean they're probably taking the guy on while paying him more as a result of believing him to be intrinsically 'better' within the study scenario so there's another gotcha in the heap
Wtf are you talking about? If women don't have children the human species will end??? Just because a woman wants to further the human species doesn't mean she deserves to be payed any less. The reason why the workforce isn't flooded with woman with the are payed less is because work forces favor men and feel they are more deserving of money. The wage gap is still alive, it may be over exaggerated from time to time but unfortunately still a thing.
I mean I've heard here and there that people get mad discrimination on the basis of 'could they be pregnant in the next 5 years' which in itself is fairly discriminatory; whether you're sick, pregnant or need psychiatric treatment companies need to give a shit about their workers. Studies have shown that men's wages increase after having kids and nobody asks whether they're going to have them (vlog brothers break this whole wage gap thing down pretty well). Which would seem like a move a company would make for its profits but again that's just corporate culture looking out for its bottom line. Lack of any parental leave along with the economic necessity and basic human desire of either sex to pursue a career is fucking Japan's birth rate up something good.
they failed to look critically at the statistics they kept mentioning. As a reporter you look at the numbers form the institutions that give you these ridiculous findings of 77 cents and deduce reasonable correlations based on what the gap could be responsible for. Everybody seems to forget that women and men generally dont work the same jobs. Tahts the biggest aspect to look at and take into consideration. There arent a lot of female coal miner, fishermen, and loggers and there arent many male nurses or daycare staff members. These discrepancies in job selection out of university is the reason why women are not being paid the same. No matter if you control for education and hours work you still have to look at it from the vantage point of them working the exact same job. Youll be surprised to find there isnt a wage gap at all.
I agree with you, and I'm a girl. Most of this gender gap crap is nonexistent. What you said about men and women in different jobs , I'm not sure. If a girl is a cola miner she should be paid the same as the guy. If a guy is a daycare employee he should be paid the same as the girl. It isn't very visible
AndreSaysHello no thats what i meant i was just saying that we dont find women in certain jobs and neither do we find men. And thats because of the choices we make.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 80 | คู่เอก "รักษ์ vs ยอดนำชัย"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ckLMRorsMeY/mqdefault.jpg)
It's like the people in this comment section completely failed to actually watch the video.
+Greg. Sym. I'm pretty sure they didn't watch it :( very sad...but at least it shows even more how naive and stupid they are...
+Greg. Sym. Watched the video and its horrible. Oliver who seems like an intelligent guy, is promoting this laughable myth that men pay women less than men because they are women.
+Greg. Sym. No, but its the same old rhetoric. The SJW may change, but the narrative stays relatively consistent.
+Greg. Sym. Indeed, there's people saying things over and over which were _addressed in the video_. I think a lot of people must've just seen that this was advocating for the wage gap and ignored the rest in order to just type out an angry comment?
(sigh)
+Hans Tjelle "different carees actually paying different wages"
Yes, sure. Mathematitians that have been studying advanced math for years and took their degrees on statistics didn't take into account the career choices women make that result in completely different jobs. They compared all jobs at the same time, even if that meant comparing a man CEO and a woman maid. They just needed YOU to tell them how to do their job properly.
Actually, he hit upon something that I might consider a very good idea for job applications: leave off the person's name when considering applications for employment. Why? Because a person's name, while useful in background checks, has absolutely no bearing on their hire-ability. Same goes with gender.
Name is needed for background checks.
Emperor of Fail Yes, which is why I clarified that.
"Because a person's name, while useful in background checks..."
This would simply require that there be a stage where those with successful background checks are then stripped down to only relevant information for the rest of the hiring process.
+SexedUpAtheist and who would strip them down?
An interesting suggestion.
Emperor of Fail Someone who worked for the company, but wasn't directly responsible for (or involved in) the hiring process, of course.
I'm just here to watch all the "men's rights activists" get pissy and defensive in the comments section.
Actually, I've seen mostly coherent and calm people, so far.
***** I know, I'm starting to get disappointed by it too.
Looks like they're just being reasonable in their accurate refutations of this wage gap nonsense.
John didn't talk about how women are much more likely to choose lower paying college majors, and how men are two times more likely to work a 40 hour work week than women, or how women have lower unemployment and far lower unemployment rates than men.
Source - www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/11/how-pew-research-measured-the-gender-pay-gap/
Hey you, you brave soul about to venture into the comment section! TURN BACK!
Thank you kind person, every now and then my curiosity gets the best of me, and I forget TH-cam Comments are just a toxic cesspool.
Thank you, kind person.
Abadon all hope ye who enter here.
The horror.
You are awesome! Thanks, I took your advice!
😂😂😂😂
*If a woman is paid 81% of what a male employee is paid for the exact same work, then why don't companies only hire women?*
+Sém because they believe that men are more capable of getting the job done nonetheless. Back then, women were not permitted to go to school, work in offices, fight wars, etc. This is not because people thought women were 'incapable' of performing such tasks, but because they supposedly were not 'made for it'.
Giannelly Rodriguez _"back then"_
I'm talking about *now*.
If women do the exact same work and cost 1/5th price of a male, why don't companies just hire women?
It would seem like the smart thing to do, except that it would expose this truth of unequal pay.
Giannelly Rodriguez There's nothing to expose. *The facts are out there, you just need to be prepared to accept them.*
According to this video, they've exposed enough. and money is only a factor of the primary issue. As well as the issue regarding not just womens soccer.
This video should be re titled "John Oliver doesn't understand what an average is and how math works"
agreed
John Oliver probably understands all too well. But John Oliver also has a hefty paycheck and John Oliver also has a boss who has another boss who gets some hefty contributions from some people.
"John Oliver echos popular opinion without actually doing any research"
John Oliver conveniently ignores margins of error and standard deviations.
He's not an idiot. This is being done to target certain voter groups.
6:48 Is no one going to notice that someone is using a Nerf N-strike Deploy against a Nerf N-strike Elite Rapidstrike? It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight, the Deploy is woefully underpowered and unreliable, while the Rapidstrike is a Fully Automatic, Flywheel powered blaster in the Elite line, it will overpower any pre-elite blaster
Finally some one is pointing out the stuff that really matters.
@@simoncommons9150 Don't let this distract you from the fact that bungie gum has both the properties of rubber and gum.
@@darealpimpofdasouth raises eyebrows
My Longshot CS-6, Vulcan EBF-25, and Titan AS-V would like a word.
@@VeraTheTabbynx Yeah.... I have a Longshot (Elite Repaint) and it's not as powerful as people say it is, I even removed the AR and still get around 60fps
6:43
What the... did someone in the audience have a traumatic experience involving Laura Roslin?
I think somebody got murdered.
Who doesn't?
Hhahahaha
What kind of an idiot would hire someone who does *the exact same thing* but demands more money? Why do people still believe this is real?
Chetz I can't believe I was duped by this back when it was first uploaded.
Chetz Well, i would assume that paying less women would come from a prejudiced view that they are less qualified. If you believe the woman is going to do the exact same job but not as well, it would be normal for you to not pay her as well, too.
Zift Ylrhavic Resfear They are less qualified for some jobs, just like men are less qualified for some jobs as well. Just how the world works. Most women just can't lift as much as most men, that's just nature. Now certain jobs that can be done by both the same I certainly think they should be paid the same, but I am pretty sure this has been debunked because the studies they did didn't actually compare men and women in the same job, just men's total wages vs womens total wages across the country in all jobs. So let's say 500k men are polled and 500k women are polled. 20k men make less than 50k a year, 40k women make less than 50k a year, they would use that to justify the study and say there is a wage gap when it's not actually pertaining to equal work.
Daniel DeFrancesco Not to mention hours worked. The comparison is often between total earnings but not even hourly wages because men work more hours than women, on average
Tyler Torrey
"Women account for something like 70% of our government spending on healthcare."
May i have the source of this please?
"When an employer pays a woman 77%, he is simply reimbursing himself for future expenditures."
You know there are assurances in place just for that. Wait a minute, i forgot i didn't live in the US, and seeing how messed up their system is, that might not be the case, so i take that back.
But let's consider this : since you don't know who is going to take a maternity leave, isn't it unfair to underpay everyone?
the wage gap is less beating a dead horse and more dragging its rotted carcass around and insisting it's still alive and that you're a misogynist for saying otherwise.
+TheLunarLegend actually it does exist www.jstor.org/stable/2782431?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
'where women are allocated to occupations and establisments that pay lower wages'
That's literally in the first paragraph of the introduction lol. Women go into lower paying careers, by choice, the wage gap isn't some patriarchal scheme it's the result of choices.
+TheLunarLegend OMG their minds are so fucked
+TheLunarLegend So you're refuting the Yale study, where a female-sounding name on a resume results in a lower salary offer than an identical resume with a male name? Were their research methods faulty? Cite your sources, please.
yruu113 Maybe cause women negotiate less, or maybe the men AND women that made those offers are sick of women being pushed through cause of screaming feminists that went into gender studies instead of a STEM field, or maybe the name John being shorter than Jennifer made it stick in the head more so they kept going over it and remembered the details of the resume better, maybe they sent the female ones to smaller labs with fewer resources than they sent the male ones to. There are a lot of reasons that could explain this. But no they just jump straight to sexism without looking at the variables just like every other idiot that believes in the gender pay gape. And yes i believe there are idiots in Yale before you say it, you can literally buy your way in. Not like it's MENSA where you at least need to be smart to get in.
There is still a logical problem with this whole thing. If a corporation can truly get away with something that is as patently illegal as gender pay discrimination then why would they hire men at all? Couldn't they save 22% in wages in doing that?
Secondly, i hate to say this but yes what job you get is going to effect how much money you make. So if women statistically works at jobs that pay less, work less hours and take years off work to raise children then your not going to make less money as a guy with a higher paying job, that works more hours and does not take years off to raise children. Which men statistically do more often. This is facts here, not sexism or misogyny. Biology exist, we are a sexually dimorphic species. Get used to it.
And when that is taken all into account then the earnings gap (which is what it is) is about 4%. So... Does that mean that there is gender pay discrimination? Possibly, there could be other factors involved. But i think you should consider that if it is gender pay discrimination 4% is a massive improvement over 22%. Like, 5 times better. But hey, those kind of numbers don't get peoples attention right? So in order to fix this "wage gap" you simply want to pay women more for work they haven't done souly based on the fact that they are female? Isn't that gender pay discrimination to? So will two wrongs make a right? God i sound like a kinder garden teacher...
And hey, that study about names on resumes is quite disturbing. There is also one that shows something like it with non European names to. But it seems to only really be effecting pay by bout 4%. You see what i did there? Like i said, that 4% is still there and like the study mentioned it could be because pay discrimination. Kind of like how male models get payed about 4 times less the a female would, and were talking about the same job with same amount of hours. Odd how no one talks about that.
Also i would like to point out that women between the ages of 20-30 are also earning more money the men currently. Not sure if that also included the old children less women mentioned in the video. Women also earn 60% of collage and university degrees. I could keep going.
Anyways i consider the "wage gap" to be misleading at best and down right dishonest at worst. Does it exist? Kind of, that 4% discrepancy is not impossible but like i said before. It could be from pay discrimination.
N3rdSci3nc3 ssshhh
Reason and logic are tools of the patriarchy to oppress women.
"And hey, that study about names on resumes is quite disturbing."
It's just as flawed as all the other "studies".
jeffiek I have read about some ideas of why those studies ended up the way they did. One reason is that since women are more likely to not not stay at the job long they get offered less. Or it could have something to do that woman are more likely to stir up trouble in the work place basically making them walking, talking lawsuits.
*"There is still a logical problem with this whole thing. If a corporation can truly get away with something that is as patently illegal as gender pay discrimination then why would they hire men at all? Couldn't they save 22% in wages in doing that?"*
Because if you're filling your staff with women, at some point some of those women logically have to get promoted to management. At which point the whole system falls down, because they're not going to be on board with that rather crappy plan. That and at some point, if you're doing it that systematically, there's going to be enough evidence for you to get sued to hell. And that's more expensive than saving wages.
*"But i think you should consider that if it is gender pay discrimination 4% is a massive improvement over 22%. Like, 5 times better."*
Someone appears to have taken a dump on my desk ...
So, you're telling me that the magical system just completely overrides corperations need to make money? I dont think so. And if they can already get away with it like i said then way waste the money? You did not give me a counter argument you just kind made a claim without evidence.
And for your second point, making a joke is not a counter argument.
N3rdSci3nc3 I think you may be responding to a different comment by accident, because that had no relation to anything I said. I'm telling you that if you fill your organisation with women, said women become an overwhelming majority and you might find that, in America, when the majority of a workforce is unhappy at being underpaid there's a thing called "unions".
Common sense, buddy. Not that hard.
"the wage gap is simply the average earnings of men and women per year. It does not take into account hours worked. It does not take into account different job positions, or different jobs." -Wage gap button
Exactly. Why don’t people pay attention to this, it takes a simple google search to find.
@@JoseMartinez-qr9pj what's even more stupid is how john takes the argument in 4:05 and use it as if it was a complete evidence that the wage gap have nothing to do with work hours or work positions .
The show has a very professional research team so it's hard to believe that this was unintentional mistake .
@Technically Difficulties The reason we have a wage gap and the reason it doesn’t take time or position into account is because women aren’t offered the same positions as men. Most time what happens is two people are up for a position one man and one women even if the women is more qualified she might not get the position. That’s why position and hours aren’t taken into account it’s not because people have different jobs or positions it’s because women even if more qualified don’t get the same positions or jobs as men just because they are a women. Women may also not be put up for a promotion when a man is. I’m sure in certain places there is a man and a women in the same position and the women is earning less. Women have to work twice as hard to get the positions they want even if they are qualified. Sometimes a women will be the interviewer and have a man and a women with the same qualifications and still pick the man. You would think a women would pick a women. It is underlying sexism that we are conditioned to have. If we wouldn’t see gender we wouldn’t have this problem. I am assuming you are a man and have never had to deal with not getting a promotion you are qualified for because of your gender or not taken seriously when you try and say something, being interrupted like you don’t matter, had to sit back and watch while two men talk about something and being put down when you try and contribute. Women are treated like children. The age gap is the way it is because of that.
It doesn’t account for alimony
@@ogdog5589 Lets pick apart your argument.
"women aren’t offered the same positions as men." This is irrelevant. You as a person apply to job. Why would you take a Job you didn't apply for?
"Most time what happens is two people are up for a position one man and one women even if the women is more qualified she might not get the position." This depends on the the field the person is going into. Anything like healthcare, child care/development(including education), and low woman work forces(STEM, Tech) you will find that woman will get the job before men. For example women in the It and software development field are three times more likely to get the job when compared to a male with the same experience.
"That’s why position and hours aren’t taken into account" no the reason why hours isn't taken into account is because the federal government only tracks if you work part time or full time, how much you make, and your gender. This is the data that they use for these studies.
"Women may also not be put up for a promotion when a man" I'm going to ignore this point because of your next point. "I’m sure in certain places there is a man and a women in the same position and the women is earning less." Your literally just adding in your own opinion as a supporting argument.
"Women have to work twice as hard to get the positions they want even if they are qualified" There have been a number of studies that show in a that when compared with woman men work longer hours and are available for more hours of the day. These studies also shown that in competitive fields on average men will work more that 40 hours a week where woman work less than 40 a week.
"If we wouldn’t see gender we wouldn’t have this problem" that is the issue. You are only seeing the gender and that is forming the problem. Yes I will admit that the corporate world has sexist dinosaurs at the top of the ladder, but you can't make the facts fit your theory.
"I am assuming you are a man and have never had to deal with not getting a promotion you are qualified" Yes as a man I have. I work in one of those listed fields above. I have a 70% chance to not get a promotion because I work with a woman and she does the job just as well as men. Why you ask, well because she is a woman and i'm a man.
"had to sit back and watch while two men talk about something and being put down when you try and contribute. Women are treated like children. The age gap is the way it is because of that." This one just sounds like you got treated like a child and your salty about it. I will respond to it non the less. Men tend to be more logic oriented than woman, men also tend to be more to the point where woman tend to take the long way around. I can see a woman make a comment about something and the males does understand how that would be relevant. (my gf does this all of the time)
Now lets talk about some of the things you didn't mention.
Men tend to have a higher salary than woman. Men also tend to argue for their salary more than woman.
What about the woman who want a child, they get paid less right? well yes and no. Lets start with taking maternity leave. They are leaving the work force for an amount of time. They are losing out is experience and/or qualifications. When they come back why would someone who is less qualified get paid the same and the rest?
Regardless of if a woman took maternity leave or not, woman who have a child tend to have more responsibility out side of work as they have a child. This lead the employee to have less responsibilities at work, which results in less pay. One can fix this by asking for more responsibilities at work and auguring a higher wage. Show the company that work comes before the baby. Sounds dumb right, right. Then why do single woman get paid more than men.
Lets talk about that for just a moment. Why do single woman get paid more than men? Could it be that single woman are ambiguous and have a career goal in mind and want to achieve? Could it be that single woman have no other persons responsibilities so they can work harder and longer? Could it be that single woman take want they want and leave the rest (aka being very direct)? I think its all of the above.
finally my favorite argument (it just make so much sense). If a company could pay woman 70% less then a man, why don't they hire just woman? That could same some companies millions of dollars.
Equal work, equal pay. Seems fair to me.
E. David but all they have to do is raise a female employees wage 17 cents but your right not so simple and its only 17 cents its not like the get 50 cents less than a man
E. David Yes.
So if I get hired onto a job I can make as much as the senior guy who has been there for 20+ years? I'm doing the same work as him seems fair to me.
It's 2016 people. John Oliver is a white progressive male, I think it's time to replace him with a woman.
Come on John, as a white male, you are too privileged. Do it for your beliefs. Step down and let a woman do your job.
Sargon
RihannaIsIluminati of Akkad
+hereLiesThisTroper Was this sarcastic?
skylar martin Search TH-cam for Sargon of Akkad and his vid about replacing John with a woman.
+hereLiesThisTroper Oh man, it is the current year. Come on people, it is the current year-- for heavens sake!
The blatant sexism in the comments is making me feel a bit uncomfortable.
Facts and simple reasoning doesn't equal sexism.
Bob McBob Do I even want really to know what your argument is? I doubt it, but lay it on me.
You hear blatant sexism against men nearly every time a feminists discusses a gender issue. Try calling them on it instead of harassing men who realize equality isn't just a self serving mind game manipulative women play on men to get stuff from people who are clearly sympathetic to their needs and issues. Treating people who you know care about as if they hate you is a form of psychological abuse. Men care deeply about women and it would help if we had a culture that recognized that instead of gas lighting men to make them easier to control.
If you really care for and respect women you can start by telling them the truth.
***** Tickle me surprised. Thanks for the link.
6:42 The mere mention of Battlestar Galactica made that one person in the crowd go fucking nuts. That person deserves some fucking respect!
I'm sorry John, but you have to compare women and men in the same job. A lot of those fox arguments, as much as I hate to admit it, were valid. A better solution to this problem is paid maternal leave. Also you said that in the Harvard experiment that it was $4000 dollars less for Jennifer, but what was the average for the man? Because if we're talking about a $250000 job, that would be statistically insignificant, however you may have a point if we're talking a minimum wage job. And I am not saying I would fight against legislation to get equal pay because 1) it already exists and 2) it would be harmless as long as it doesn't say something like "women have to be paid more than men". The remaining 5 to 8 cents could be partially fixed paid family and medical leave. or maybe you could post everyone's pay for everyone to see to avoid those times when there is discrimination, But the rest can be explained by unfortunate circumstances such as due to biology, women are the only gender that can have babies, and most often take care of the baby after that. So jobs that have less flexible hours often can't have as many women in them.
+Noah Borthwick "I'm sorry John, but you have to compare women and men in the same job."
/watch?v=it0EYBBl5LI
+w3irdo13 There's the whole burden of proof issue. If you claim the wage gap is a result of discrimination you need to prove it. And the "god in the gaps" is no form of proof.
Daniel Fisher Did you not see the video I linked?
***** I did, it doesn't prove it's a result of discrimination.
Daniel Fisher No, but it does show that men and women in the same job get paid differently.
John Oliver is dead wrong in this argument. Usually I like him and he usually is right factually, but he was absolutely wrong on this one and is letting his liberal bias cloud his judgement, by the way I am a liberal but I think for myself not mindlessly agree with everyone else. I mean he cherry picked one new study to dispute the argument that women pick different jobs and thus get paid differently, well John what about all the other studies huh? There are literally hundreds of studies that show the difference is around 94-96 cents to every dollar a man makes when you take into account all factors like what the job is, how much experience, etc., and even then it is still debatable whether the 5% difference is discrimination. This isn't sexism...
I mean sexism still exist in some cases, like slut shaming, etc. But many other cases its exaggerated and blamed on "patriarchy" or some other made up feminist bullshit, like "subject acting on object" which is quite funny and flat out retarded logic.
Modern feminism is not based on facts or reasoning...
*****
All I am saying is the problem is exaggerated, I love how riled up you get in the 5% difference in pay, yet you probably have no problem men paying for dinner and buying expense jewelery with almost no resale value. Do you have a problem with the custom of men buying expense rings for women when proposing?
I am sure you are as passionate during divorce settlements and child custody hearing too right?
*****
Yea right, I find that difficult to believe. But if what you say is true than I applaud you for your fairness, unfortunately the rest of society doesn't follow your example, your in the minority.
Daoyi Liu
These are not hasty conclusions. Why did I not believe when Dutchess said she didn't ask her significant other to buy her things, its because that is not the norm. I did not falsely assume that women act this way, many women do. I mean look valentines day is coming and the ads are filled with companies convincing men to buy expensive jewelry for women so they can be happy. Its advertised on such a continuous basis every year because its a cultural norm not an oddity.
Also if you don't believe me look at divorce settlement and child custody statistics and come back to me. Majority of the time women are favored by a huge margin, in fact sometimes judges can even pardon prenuptials if they choose to for some bullshit reason. There is a reason why almost 70% of all divorces in the US are initiated by women, its because they have everything to gain from it.
The point is, you and other modern feminists are hyper aware of sexism that is faced by women, but constantly ignore the blatant double standards and prejudices faced by men. You assume that they have some special "privilege" and thus there problems are not as important.
What about the fact that almost 80% of homeless people are males? What about the fact that 60% of all college students are female? What about the fact that 80% of child custody decisions are won by women? What about the fact that if you're a women you have a much higher chance of escaping jail sentences as opposed to men solely based on your sex? And cultural norms where men have to provide and are constantly bombarded by society that they have to support a women with money because women want to feel "secure"?
These aren't random misinformed views of mine, these are facts that you refuse to acknowledge because of your bias.
And again, a 5% (it is 5%, not 5-17, not maybe, its 5%) difference in wage gap is not necessarily sexism it might be something else attributed to gender but not necessarily on the part of the employer. For instance, its proven that men negotiate much better for a higher salary, than women. It might be because women are MORE LIKELY to be unsure/less confident about themselves, and that is probably biological as well.
*****
Classic straw-man argument, when did I say you forced your man to cough up his money?
Typical feminist self-victimization so you can feel better about yourself, do you get a kick out of it or something?
Its cultural, its society that tells him and women that what men "should" do because women need to feel secured and loved, etc.
Its a mixture of sexual dimorphism and cultural norms. Its a fact that men favor looks much more than status, while women on the other look at status (fame, money, etc.) more than physical appearances to find a suitable mate., its biology/evolution.
Daoyi Liu
I don't even know where to start. Because you constantly create straw-man arguments...
1: Correlation doesn't equal causation. Homelessness and college attendance is not relevant to the topic of wage gap.
Of course it is, if the problem with wage gap is sexism, which what you are constantly spouting then so are those glaring issues that heavily favorable to women.
2: It is between 5% and 17%. I am not going to cherry pick these numbers. In the lower percentile, it may indeed be because of lack of negotiation and confidence. In these cases, it is important to teach women to be more assertive in wage negotiations, not ignore the problem and belittle their attempts. But in the upper percentile, this is not necessarily the case. It has been scientifically proven that many women get less starting salaries even to begin negotiations (and btw the prejudice comes from both men AND women, this isn't a competition, this is a battle against societal norms). No matter how rare it is, as long as it still happens, it needs to be addressed. I don't know why you're so opposed to this.
There is nothing to cherry pick the number is around 5%, than "between 5-17", if you cannot admit this than you're in denial. Its important to know this because it highlights the extent of the problem, a 17% difference almost certainly has to be partly because of sexism, while 5% on the other hand doesn't because its too small to make conclusion on the whole population. And the 5% difference can be a host of other factors, do you understand statistic incorporates error when making inferences on a huge population? They don't actually tally every single man and women in the US they take "random" sample and then this in itself creates error. That 5% is almost negligible and can be attributed to multiple factors, but you reach the conclusion its sexism.
3: Progress is about CHANGING the norms when they become irrelevant. That means CHANGING the perception that men should pay for everything even if he's earning less or can't afford it, changing the perception that women should be paid less, and changing the perception that men cannot be good caretakers. If a man proves to be a better caretaker than his ex-wife, then he should get custody. Gender bias harms everyone, and this is something even feminists agree with. You are, once again, assuming things about people despite everything I talked about in my previous comment.
If feminist agree with this then why is child custody laws favored 80% to women? I mean that is a glaring difference, and one that can be directly related to sexism, yet you're getting worked up over the 5% in pay that may or may not be sexism. Yup that's equality for ya, "ladies first."
4: Nobody is blatantly ignoring the problems that men face. Talking about women's problems doesn't automatically silence men's problems.
No problems that are obviously distinguished as sexism should be addressed, the problems I mentioned are mind-numbingly obvious, the 5% difference isn't.
5: Privilege does not negate disadvantage. A black person can still support gay rights. A man can support women's rights, and a woman can and should support and address the problems that men face. Even poor people can and should have sympathy for the problems of the rich, but this takes strong moral character that many people lack.
I don't why you are telling me this, maybe you should read it...because I want equality, not constantly support modern feminist agenda about the victimization of women, since they often refuse to acknowledge or do anything for men. And if you think feminism supports men's right as much as women's, than you're in denial and part of the problem.
6: I never claimed to be feminist, and I agree that many people go overboard. But I see problems where they arise and believe that problems should be dealt with, not ignored simply because they are problems of people I disagree with. I don't know where your prejudices come from, whether it's from personal experience or simply what you see in the media, but sweeping generalizations and making moral decisions based on stereotypes is just not good. You shouldn't refuse to interact with black people just because there are black people in prison, and you shouldn't get angry about wage equality simply because some women are privileged and sexist.
Again, I don't think you understand. I want equality, but I want the issues that glaringly sexist fixed first. I don't want people constantly bring in to light the 5% difference and claiming its sexism. I mean where is the uproar over the 20%, difference in college student admittance, and there is not debate over that figure. Where is the cry from feminism to fix this obvious problem, I mean its a 20% difference, I hope you understand this.
I could go on, but I doubt you'll read it all. I have a feeling you're not here to have a conversation. There are those who are genuinely angry at people who fight for change, and think everyone should just shut up and take a spoonful of sugar with all their problems.
I have feeling you aren't actually listing to what I am saying and have preconceived notion of what I believe. You keep creating straw-man arguments so its easier to debate them, yet I doubt you'll read this considering you're in denial over reality.
That wage gap statistic is actually false. The 77 cent figure was made comparing all working men to all working women. They did NOT keep in mind that men have more higher paying jobs that women. And that is not, comparing the same job in the same field, that is comparing all of the women who are teachers, to all the men who are nuclear physicists, and they are upset that pay is not equal. Men are the vast majority in 9 out of 10 highest payed careers, architects engineers etc. Women are the same, but with the LOWEST paying careers. This is not discrimination, it is just the path our economy has taken.
***** Not to say that there is no wage gap at all, but if you compare those in the same career and same field, it is much MUCH less prominent. And that is something which will likely never be fixed in an open market economy such as ours.
Mr. Man Lightnin Could you site your source for that?
It's just that my understanding was it was an average in like for like jobs. I don't think anyone is trying to compare being a cleaner with the head of a fortune 500 company.
David Heffron www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/21/barack-obama/barack-obama-ad-says-women-are-paid-77-cents-dolla/
Rodrigo de Toni That's a pretty retarded claim. If the sexes act differently it makes them both sexist? That essentially what you are putting forward. The fact that more women take careers such as nursing or teaching, and the fact that more men have careers like architect or physicist is not sexism in our culture, it is biology. And before you do, do not go saying that our biology is sexist just because men are naturally stronger and women are naturally drawn toward raising children.
***** Comment section or term paper - if you'd like us to not assume that you're pulling stats out of your ass, then you should probably let us know where you got the information. Don't assume that your facts are well known.
I was a very young girl, 8th grade, when I heard from the media that there's a gender wage gap. I immediately went to the most intelligent woman in my life, my mother, a college professor. I asked her if she was ever paid less monthly salary than any of her male counterparts. Her answer was a surprised no. Because that would be illegal. All of her male and female colleagues received the same salary. She was an associate professor at that time so her salary was obviously less than the head of the department, who happened to be a man. But after 5 years when my mom became the head of the department, she was actually being paid equivalent to her predecessor (technically higher because of inflation because the salaries of all the jobs had gone up in this time).
Because it didn’t happen to your mother (which awesome for her btw) it must not happen to anyone. That’s a great logic, because I have never been kicked in the nuts it must mean it has never happened to anyone. So I’ll just go around “not possibly kicking” misogynistic bosses who “can’t possibly pay a woman less” on the nuts.
@R G lmao see how when you bring logic into the equation they all disappear
@R G 1. Its hard to take you seriously and congratulate you on your "logic" when you immediately threaten someone cause they disagreed with you.
2. Wasnt there a piece on how something was wrong with the ERA?
R G they do. All the industries associated with women (secretarial work, teachers, nurses, housecleaners, waitresses etc)were not magically bestowed on society for women or coincidentally optimal for the personality traits and abilities of all women (or at least the percentage of women who occupy those professions). There were actual campaigns to do as you say “save money” by hiring exclusively women because, drumroll, they could get away with paying them less.
@R G my bad I thought I was discussing someone in good faith. Toodaloo
I've seen far too many sources debunking the wage gap (at least in terms of 'less pay for the same work') and yet I can't seem to find any actual cases where an employer is actively discriminating against women in this way. Feminists talking about this never even attempt to quote a single example of this (illegal, by the way) activity being done.
So at the end of the day, they've turned an issue that's entirely down to individual women's choices (whether influenced by men or not) into an issue that's about discrimination.
Yetaxa ctmirror.org/2014/01/31/connecticut-women-victims-of-pay-gap/
Peregrine Justice Enger you do understand that there are no evidence whatsoever in that article that support suck claim. the only one actual evidence are the TOTAL wages of men and women. Those are all the wages of men vs all the wages of women in the US. It doesnt account for the fact that most of the highest paying jobs are occupied by men... It's like saying why r 10 people working as school teachers r earning less than 10 people working at wallstreet...
that doesn't make it acceptable to say that the wag gap A: doesn't exist and B: isnt sexist . the reason so many men have high paying jobs is because the work system is based off of men and the fact women have only recent;y began actually taking jobs (thousands of years>1970+). its broken in other words,and it needs fixing. don't over simplify,
Peregrine Justice Enger wtf? it's the men's fault women choose different type of jobs?? to answer you. (A) it is acceptable to say there is not a wage gap bc women and men are paid the same salaries for the exact same job (as long they are the same hours) and (B) it isn't sexist that women usually choose other lines of work than men do. It just is. Let me tell u something else. It is a fact that more women enter the university than men. Does that make the universities (or even the women who enter the universities) sexist towards men? NO BECAUSE IT WAS THEIR CHOICE!
Anastasis K I didnt say it was mens fault women "chose" different jobs, I said the job market and jobs in general that pay more than "women jobs" (teaching, personal support etc) are based of of men and how they can work longer than women. also its been proven that the wage gap exits its a lot smaller when you count out subliminal pushes and open sexist discrimination, but it still exists. the wage gap isnt just guys in big offices telling women they cant get paid as much. its complicated. if you actualy want to hear why ill happily explain it.
Women should obviously be paid the same amount as men for doing the same job. But this will not remove the wage gap entirely. When calculating the male and female average wages, things like working hours and pregnancy leave do affect the numbers. While it's not the women's fault that they can get pregnant, it's not the men's fault either.
We have to acknowledge that humans are a sexually dimorphic species.
All of the upvotes. ^
One day human cloning will be legal and the entire gap will go. One day.
"While it's not the women's fault that they can get pregnant, it's not the men's fault either." Pretty sure a man and a woman are involved in most pregnancies. If maternity leave was the same for both (guilty) parties, some of the wage discrimination might disappear. Of course, that could be a disincentive to having children...
nimrodery We don't have to waste time rigging the game to make sure men and women live the exact same lives. Let people make their own choices because what they really want is the freedom to do so. The activist will play these mind games to no end until we tell them we've had enough. The pursuit of equality isn't about giving feminist a permanent job to micro managing all of our lives.
edtastic It's not about living the exact same life, it's about men and women assuming equal responsibility in raising children. Is it okay that it's a woman's unpaid "job" to raise children while the "breadwinner" is free to make money? Shouldn't responsibility be shared equally considering it takes both genders to produce children? Why should employers even hire women, when they will inevitably have to lose them to maternity leave? Change a few diapers while making dinner and cleaning the house, then I'll be able to hear what you're saying about "micromanaging."
1:39 this is assuming that everyone on the white house staff has the same exact job
*****
they just want to get a cheer from the audience. it's sad seeing obvious holes in john oliver's/jon stewart's arguments because it starts feeling like even supposed political rhetoric is propaganda.
I know, right? Let the accountant have the same salary like that of the VP.
HOLY SHIT! Maybe i should start a company and hire all women to save money
AJSSPACEPLACE that’s gender discrimination, it’s illegal and more obvious. Tho I agree the wage gap is false #Shoe0nHead
@@caemanlipsey7201 that was a joke...
I've got the perfect place for a cathouse. Right this way, sir!
You would most likely lower production and quality as well.
@@m.m2594 Yes they are. The joke is saying "I am making a company and only hire women to save money" as the person who made this comment thread said. But the first commenter did not get that, so I told him that it was a joke.
I love how in this segment, they show and give examples, and the comments are just "No they dont get paid less!"
There are not examples, all he mentions is a study, and some unrelated statistics. The comment section is actually filled with alot more realistic arguments.
Mr. Man Lightnin
those are examples!
what is with the internet and denying that womens issues exist? lol
***** I can say, "a study was performed recently that proves unicorns exist" you need the actual documentation, the environment it was performed in, and the basis for the test, The statistic he mentioned (77 cents to a dollar) was not even attributed to the right comparison. He is wrong, John should have checked this shit before he spouted this feminist rhetoric that has no place in the debate scene.
Mr. Man Lightnin
Theres more than one study that does show that women earn less in the workplace.
what about the university experiment mentioned in the piece?
Also "Feminist Rhetoric"....oooh those scary women are coming to get you! like seriously, what you think people just made this up? why? what would be the point?
***** Are you fact averse?
Consad report. Look it the fuck up.
You can't talk wage equality until you force companies to publish wages, which they will lobby hard against because they like to use differential pricing when they hire, keeping employees in the dark about how much their work is actually worth.
I have to disagree with John on this one. If women made 83cents for every dollar men make then businesses would hire only women and save 17% on labour costs. Chinese workers make significantly less than north american workers that why most manufactures moved their.
Exactly this. But you must understand John - today if you don't kiss feminist ass... #canceljohn #johntheoprssor and so on.
lifebarier This. so much this.
Matheus Torres
It's as fact as "fact" that women are prime victims of domestic violence (it's ~50/50 FYI). It's bullshit hysteria to attract more funding for women "issues" and to get more dimwits to vote for whoever claims to know how to fix it.
lifebarier LOL, what's the source for your 50/50, or is it just from your imagination? How often do you read news about men getting beaten up or killed by their girlfriends/wives? Certainly much less than the opposite.
Good point.
I wonder if John Oliver's female staff get equal pay.
Obviously...
I'm sure there's women in manager and pay choice positions to encourage equality. At the same time, television productions only have so many employees, some of which are making minimum wage and others thousands of dollars per hour. It'd be a small sample size with high variation, it's not really a scenario in which discrimination would make much calculable difference. The margin of error is too huge.
Probably not because they'll apply for unskilled jobs.....just like a lot of other women.
Women in television do not get equal pay or opportunity.
@@emhu2594 yeah they do, actually some women (some men do too, just to a lower extent) make more because they're attractive and they'll drive viewership up
I saw a homeless man and gave him 1$
I saw a homeless woman and gave her 0.77$
Ah, it's all your fault... :)
Thank you for giving to the homeless.
I saw a homeless man named Rich
@@thevrana Isn't that terrible?
I laughed so hard at your comment I woke up my wife, that earns more than me, and she kicked me out of the room to go sleep on the couch where all my electronic toys are.
It was worth it. Now im watching 'Friends' on Netflix. Win/Win
I have liked Last Week Tonight up to this point, but the amount of fallacies in this video have made me question John's previous videos. I don't know what he is trying to accomplish or what his opinion on what to do to solve the nonexistent pay gap, but this is disappointing.
E. David I didn't say he "hurt my beliefs" Just that he hurt my belief in his accuracy.
E. David Nothing rational about belief in statistical fabrications.
If you think there is a wage gap, you're uninformed. It's pretty simple.
***** Nobody is denying that women on average make less than men on average. The difference is intelligent people can look at the reasons why that is the case and find they make a lot of sense. Reactionary people see those numbers and immediately assume there is some kind of societal conspiracy afoot.
***** Nice troll. 1/10. Would feed at a homeless shelter.
Ok, well what are the numbers then? I'm pretty facinated, seeing as you must be an expert in this field to be so confident in the falsities. What institute do you study for?
So I'm an educated man just out of college living in an urban area. On average women make 8 percent more than I for doing the same job. Where is the outrage? Hell where is even the recognition?
It's hard to recognise things which don't appear to have happened.
MurrayTheMac Yet look at all the uproar for the wage gap, can't be that hard.
Mr. Man Lightnin Except that *is* happening..
MurrayTheMac Not according to reality.
Patrick Joseph Klocek Did you just try to play the "poor white discriminated against males" card ...?
Wow.
I would have liked this to be a full 20 minute episode cause I think many things should have been looked into more
agreed! For instance, explaining the wage gap myth!
Me too! Like how single, childless women under 44 are earning 8% more then men! I'm all of those things, but male. But of course according to John, this is still somehow my fault.
Vox actually did a really good deep dive on their Netflix show explained. It's free to watch on TH-cam if you're interested in a proper analysis.
@@higate_col You lost us at the word Vox.
@@Reggie2000 I know they do a lot of biased content, but this ep is actually really grounded and is one of the only place that I've seen really discuss the real causes of wage gaps.
Where's shoe0nhead's wage gap button when you need it?
I'm honestly a little sad He didn't point out the exact meaning
Jordynn isHumann 😂 I know right, it's so annoying
Yup
I know right?
Ikr
That one chick really liked Battlestar Galactica
@DonJohnGaming : 🐤...?
"...Battlestar Galactica's Laura Roslin-"
**excited scream from the audience**
Good to see I'm not the only one who adores that character.
Close the wage gap and give paternity leave to fathers when children are born.
Paternity leave can be counterproductive to closing the wage gap, if fathers use paternity leave for career development instead of parenting.
Yes!!
Yes!!!!!!!!!!
Closing the wage gap would involve forcing women to work in higher paying professions.
I am for more women SUGAR MAMAS, so men DO NOT have to WORK!!!
Fucking hell John, paying women less is illegal since 1963
so what?
So we need to make it more illegal?
Svetlozarov It's still happening. So something should be done to fix it.
Even if we assume that's true, what?
Svetlozarov I'm not sure exactly. But the first step to solving a problem is recognizing that there is a problem.
The fact that people in the comments have further understanding of this and aren’t just following the shows argument, says some really positive stuff about the normal viewers
i'm honestly surprised to see this too. many of john oliver's videos are terribly supported like this one, but ppl will easily jump on it as the right take because john oliver speaks with strong conviction, and the humorous effect makes the surface of his arguments more compelling but it usually lacks depth or insight.
Well someone's a big Battlestar Galactica fan.
My ears....
Some lady screamed so loud I thought it was for Starbuck because I didn't know that actresses real name.
The Number came from a Study, comparing the Salray of ALL Men vs. The salary of ALL Woman. It dosnt account for Experience, Education, regions or even Different Jobs
Allways the same. They forget man take the most dangerous and hardest jobs like mining and oil extraction
@@brunobastos5533 But these Jobs actually pay Bad.
But nobody does Taalk about that 90% of Suicides are Male, 70% of Ho eless People are Male, 95% of Battlefield Fatallities are Male and 80% Workplace Fatallities are Male. But they get Angry at a Disproven and Old Number.
@@marius1733 but there are heavy jobs that pay good money that are filled by man, and no forget the "geeks" jobs linked to hi-tech
@@brunobastos5533 If People would Acknowledge the Fact that there are Differneces between men and Woman, if they are in The Interests or Biological factors, it would be easuer, but no.
Men and Woman are exactly the same.
This comment section is just full of intellectuals.
There is a pay gap between tall and short people too. :(
Also a height gap.
They should RISE UP
For men... Tall men are more likely to get hired...
There is also a pay gap between good looking and ugly people as well.
Yeah it’s called NBA and MLS
my only question is, if businesses can get away with paying women less... why are they not looking for women workers instead of men?. people higher illegals because of that reason, even if they don't like them
Companies aren't simply offering women lower wages, that statistic is too general and very often misinterpreted.
And if companies are required to increase women's wages, they will simply start hiring men.
*hire
Another question is: If there's such a wage gap, why aren't we hearing about class action lawsuits running rampant, of women everywhere suing their employers for discrimination?
OK, so what I think he's saying is that there is a preconception by men (patriarchy) that men do a better job so they are able to negotiate higher wages because of that.
But if men are so prejudiced, why don't women create the next Uber, Google or Apple and higher only women, which are cheaper then? I mean, we live in free market capitalism. Just come up with a great product, and hire whomever you want.
+Daniel Jones *hire
Also you are taking an issue that is complicated and turning into something so simple it sounds ridiculous.
It's actually pretty simple - post the salary or wage for the positions you're hiring for. Make it apply across the board. Wage negotiations at the hiring interval are generally unpleasant for both parties anyway, and it will simplify matters for hiring in general.
It's not that simple at all. There can be candidates that the employer realllyyy likes and there can be candidates the employer kind of likes or is "good enough". So depending on how strongly someone is qualified for the position, the salary is going to vary. Even pro-athletes within the same league can make a few millions of dollars to 10s of millions depending on unique their skillset and expertise is. That's why it's important to negotiate salary once the employer reviews the candidate based on resume and interview performance because it's truly depends case by case basis on this. Even within the same company, I saw that interns were making 30/hr and another making 45/hr because one works in a better funded org since that org brings in more revenue for the company.
Yeah, just echoing BRBallin1's comment. You absolutely _should_ pay experienced workers with great technical + soft skills more. Money is (or at least should be) a mirror of value added to a system, and you can get a rough sense of that value early in the interviewing process. A company would be forced to either (a) lose good talent to other companies who posted a higher starting salary or (b) overpay less qualified employees who simply aren't contributing enough value to the company to offset their compensation. Both scenarios end up hurting the company, potentially fatally (especially for smaller businesses), which hurts _everyone's_ paychecks.
> Wage negotiations at the hiring interval are generally unpleasant for both parties anyway
At first they definitely can be. Practice -- take every job interview you can, including a couple/few for jobs you aren't interested in (you can use those to try new approaches you usually might not try). Be confident in the value you contribute. Look at your work history with a couple friends who can help point out areas you might be too modest to acknowledge as going above and beyond the call of duty. From your comment, I'd wager you enjoy on some level problem solving and making the workplace better -- use that. Go out of your way to learn and invest in your expertise, and then use that to find creative, novel solutions to obstacles at work. Super brownie points if you talk to people about the obstacles _they're_ facing (which is in itself value added just by making people feel heard) and do the same for them. Make it impossible for people to not recognize the value you contribute, including yourself, and negotiating raises or starting salaries will come much more naturally.
Absolutely not, you wouldn’t run a business that way either. My boss offered me an hourly wage for my job that my coworkers (in this case women) had accepted but I was unwilling to accept. I make at least 10% more than they did, only, because I asked and didn’t accept. Some women would do the same as I did, most would not. #wagegap
@@AdamLovesHorror People shouldn't have to ask for higher wages. We don't want to teach people to humbly know and stand up for their value, acknowledging that different hormones make this harder for some people. That'd be crazy. Companies should just pay everyone the same fair wage. If you ask for a better wage than your colleagues are getting, then you're just an arrogant piece of crap who thinks you're better than everyone else. And probably sexist.
@@dismalthoughts wow that’s a lot of name calling and assumptions on your part. Let me take the biological sex out of the equation by making them both males in this case so no different. Both workers do the same job BUT very in any workforce do those two do their job in the exact same way. Likely one does it faster, cleaner, receives more compliments or criticisms. Why should they make the same simply because they do the same job? If you own the company and are hiring me but I’m only available 2 days a week, but my counterpart is available night or day, 7 days a week, that person doing the same job as I would be more valuable. Those who have more value to the company would be paid more. If you still disagree with me, that is absolutely fine. I’m no sexist, I consider myself a feminist actually, but maybe not how you would define me. Have a wonderful day and thanks for telling me your side of it.
*The wage gap is simply the average earnings of men and women working full time. It does not count for different job positions, hours worked, or different jobs. It has nothing to do with the same job. It has nothing to do with discrimination.*
Hai june
Shoeonheadddd
I'm looking for a woman who has had a job where she got paid less than her male coworkers or a man who has had a job where he got paid more than his female coworkers. So far I have not been able to find any. Please tell me if you are such a person.
Well, Zoe Quinn makes less than Gabe Newell, and we all know that those two put the same amount of effort to get where they are today...
Majestic Koopa
I'm looking for someone who has personally been in that situation.
I have.
Squirrel_Of_Mistri What job was that?
gastronomist The squirrel was, a gastronomist *revealing music plays*
equal pay act happened in the 60's.
Discrimination is more complex are more subtle and the existent of that act dont mean employers dont break the laws
+Keyser Soze No, discrimination is illegal, if you are the victim of it you have the option to go to the police, if you don't, you have nothing to complain about.
That is iligeal dont mean i does not happen, the problem here is not individual cases is that is sistematic
+Keyser Soze The only difference one makes in pay is attributed to their negotiating of salaries, additional training that may cause them to be a more valuable asset to the business (such as a teacher having a doctorate instead of a bachelors) and in no way, shape or form is directly affected by color of the employee's skin, their sex, sexual orientation (ect) If someone is paid less specifically because of these reasons, that is grounds for a lawsuit. If it just so happens that men more aggressively negotiate salaries than women or, on average have more qualifications for the job this is not discrimination, this is a meritocracy at work.
+Keyser Soze
Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself. Only the hard core liberals echo the bullshit narrative that women are being paid less just because they're women. A quick Google search will quickly dissolve the illusions and lies that these feminist liars perpetuate. Do your research, or go back to your echo chamber. Just don't drag your bullshit accusations out into reality or you're going to have a rude awakening.
wow this changes what I thought.
before when I heard women made $0.77 to the dollar a man makes I assumed that that was for the same job. I thought hey that's bad and how is that still a thing?
now I know women get about equal pay for equal work (aka same position and level of experience) and that statistic is just comparing all jobs when on average men are employed longer and in higher paying professions. all this talk of inequality is now obviously BS.
Yes I did and then I did some more research. the misleading $0.77 on the dollar stat comes from comparing all jobs. when you compare equal work (same job and experience level) women actually get equal pay. Yes you can find some people who are sexist but that's not what the workplace as a whole is like.
A lot of people just like misleading people and others like to think of themselves as victims, sad really.
seems you are one of the people who love to play the victim and select the information you intake. the fact is that as a whole the U.S. job market pays equal wages for equal work (when comparing the same job and level of experience). yes there have been sexist people but they don't represent the norm however you can cherry pick them if you want to whine about a non existent issue.
women being paid less than men (for the same job) is a myth, that's just a fact. The difference in pay comes from differing jobs and experience, men tend to stay in the work force longer.
as for women being on average in lower paying professions, that's their choice. they have an equal opportunity.
When it comes down to it women are paid equal wages for equal work, that is when you define equal work as the same job and level of experience, so sayeth the facts. go whine somewhere else
That would be sexist and wrong, if it were true. The statistics like women earn $0.77 for the mans $1 are comparing the average wages of all men and women. To get a better understanding of how equality is nowadays you need to compare men vs women's pay in the SAME job and experience level, not the average for all men vs women. The statistics for women being hired for the same position with the same level of experience is that they are given the same pay.
Like I said before, women tend towards lower paying professions (for example nurses while a majority of doctors are men). Men also stay in the workforce longer thus get a higher salary for experience. This is why women earn $0.77 on average, it is because some people like to play victim and others like to score points with demographics by giving misleading information.
now that you have been informed, again, I won't read your reply as you have demonstrated either an inability to intake new information or you're trolling. good night.
Lilith Geisler this study by the US Dept. of Labor might be of interest.
www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf
"Statistical analysis that includes variables has produced results that
collectively account for an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent."
Lilith Geisler problem is, if you make your case for equality (which is obviously a thing that needs to be acted upon and brought about) on a completely false statistic, the waters are muddied and it's a lot harder to make any headway for equality. there are so many REAL reasons to fight for equality, but basing it all around the wage gap myth is going to turn people against you and you're going to have a MUCH harder fight because you're basing your arguments on misinformation.
I remember an argument regarding wage gap...
Men get paid more because they choose higher-paying jobs, e.g. doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc.
Meanwhile, women choose jobs like female doctor, female lawyer, female engineer, etc.
here John Oliver got on the "go with emotions not truth" train that appeals so much to women, which doesn't say a lot about him...
there are more male workers with higher payed jobs than female and that's THE TRUTH! If there's a problem, it is that women don't pursue dangerous and other high-salary jobs, and I as a well payed 25 years old male IT specialist don't give a fuck about and won't take any whining whatsoever!
From 12 workers in our company, 2 are female - one is a designer and the other is an accounting. When I studied in an IT academy couple of years ago, the female students were about 15 to 20 percent of all students...
but instead of looking at things objectively, let's overreact and completely ignore facts...
Study just came out by the OECD which agreed that the reasons for the pay gap are because there are more male workers with higher paid jobs than female, and also showed evidence that the reason for that is because those higher paid jobs are both more hostile toward recruiting women and that girls have less confidence in themselves to be able to do those jobs (evidenced by their having less confidence when it comes to the more scientific school subjects such as maths).
So ... there's some facts. That male workers having higher paid jobs is not in dispute (from here, anyway). Why that's the case, however, is.
On the confidence - A lot of PEOPLE have/had problems with confidence in themselves, that's not a gender issue
On the hostility - I need to see the study before making any comments.
On the study - citation needed :)
Herowar It came out from the OECD last week. Highly publicised, a google search on them will show it up for you.
It shows a much higher proportion of girls have confidence issues in regards to maths, sciences and engineering than boys. Which is where it becomes a gender issue.
***** We already have enough evidence that men and women are treated differently when it comes to STEM subjects. Maths and science are male-dominated industries, and the public perception and stereotypes of some subjects is that they're "boy" subjects (e.g. computer science, maths, physics, etc). There's not been any research to suggest that girls biologically are not as good as boys in those subjects, so unless that changes ... the only logical conclusion is that the confidence levels are down to those social stereotypes and perceptions.
The burden of proof is on you to give some biological evidence, if you're going to claim that there's a biological reason for it. You can't just claim that men and women have different brains and that's why there's this difference without any biological basis for it ... that's far less scientific.
***** If you want me to provide evidence, that's extremely easy. There's plenty of scientific studies that the undertake of STEM is down to gender stereotypes. There is science which points that direction very heavily.
www8.gsb.columbia.edu/newsroom/newsn/2700/new-research-proves-gender-bias-extraordinarily-prevalent-in-stem-careers
blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/
www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full
www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/08/new-study-finds-men-more-likely-doubt-evidence-gender-bias-science-fields
So, so many studies have said "this social bias exists", whereas I haven't seen ANY science to suggest that there's a biological reason for it. The burden of proof is on you to provide that evidence of a biological imperative.
Woah it's a pre-trump Kelly Anne Conway
A wild Kelly Anne Conway has appeared!
The wild Kelly Anne Conway used alternative facts!
It's super effective!
My issue isn't wage gap, but rather people trying to sway things. I love computers. I want to be a computer programmer. However, I have been told I physically cannot handle the job by a woman who came in to talk about college options. I hate that the guys in my computer class look at me like an object. That's what really bothers me.
@Seòladair Grey hello fellow time traveler
Studied CS for three yrs. This is accurate.
Women are favored for STEM jobs. women are given better grades in school despite men doing better on objective things like taking a math test. women got equal rights in spite of being different and are given special rights or double standards too. self employed women earn less, but when hired, they actually are paid more FOR THE SAME JOB than men are, but the pay gap exists due to biology and personal choices (EARNING less for DIFFERENT work is not sexist).
I'd give details/evidence but that's probably a waste. click the sub/bell icons on channel Playitalready for a future vid on this.
@@ethandeister6567 the wage gap is a myth it doesn’t even take into consideration job occupation
@@ethandeister6567 uh because they choose different occupations. You can’t look at Scandinavia for example they have the most egalitarian society in the world and yet women outnumber men in nursing and teaching at a ratio of about 10:1 while men outnumber women in the stem fields at about the same ratio. Maybe your social conditioning has made you forget that we’re animalistic creatures with natural inclinations towards our male/female roles. I appreciate you having a civilized conversation but please look into the differences between the interests of the 2 genders rather than blaming it on a sexiest society. If anything the laws and justice system are more sexist towards men than women ie men serve 60% longer sentences for the same crime as a woman or that men only get joint custody of their children 10% of the time
It’s hilarious that a show that dedicated in part, a portion of an episode to P-Hacking and misrepresenting statistics, would then misrepresent statistics.
What episode was this?
OK, that's fair, I will accept the "John vs Jennifer" study with only a 127 applicant sample study if you can explain why women are preferred 2 to 1 in STEM with a 873 sample study with the same "exact application" variable the "John vs Jennifer" study used.
I'll wait... www. pnas. org/content/112/17/5360.full. pdf
Great comment but remember this guy is pandering to the left and they eat this stuff up.
Yep, I'm currently studying computer science and recently had a girl tell me how much she will be disadvantaged and underpaid, I'm like: "Nope, you'll actually be offered more money and be twice as likely to be hired as I'll be."- she immediately exclaims: "Well not if your boss is a man!" It's fucking unreal, she's gonna make bank no problem and right now she also still has the looks to get a guy to take care of her if she wants to, and she still gets to tell her horror stories about the evil man taking her rights.
I'd swap with her any day. I think Icould manage the extra tampon costs.
ZenoDovahkiin That right there, is the problem with feminism.
Pretty much. And then, no joke, during the next day, someone came to us during a maths course and told us about how "underrepresented" women are in stem, telling the girls to apply for a female only scholarship they have to do nothing for, so now she is actually getting payed 300€ vagina bonus a month. True story.
Because as we all know, sample size is the only variable that matters in a study. Methodology and data analysis have never made a study less reliable than another!
Once again, Oliver nails it. And I'd advise anyone with an aversion to being disgusted to avoid the comment sections. It appears as though those dreadful MRAs (read: mysognists) are out in full force.
ZDProletariat I would define misogyny as someone who holds a certain prejudice towards women, and often that prejudice erupts into animosity, oppression, or even violence. MRA-ism developed as prejudicial instinctive knee-jerk reaction to what its constituents believed were threats to "traditional gender roles," meaning that they wanted to maintain their power while holding women down - which amounts to oppression. The overlap between the two groups is so significant that any perceived distinctions are blurry and arbitrary at best.
And for the record (if you're bothering to read this far), I do not instinctively dismiss anyone who "simply disagrees" with me. I consider myself to be fairly open-minded and welcoming of dialectism. Butttttt, when one starts generalising races, genders, and other minority groups negatively because of some inherent biological characteristic/trait - I will assume that they're bigoted. Which seems to me to be a rather accurate and restrained way of putting it, ffs.
You will not sway my stance unless you bring me a logical, coherent, and non-bigoted argument that clearly illustrates why I'm wrong. Until then, good day.
ZDProletariat *Sigh* Yeah, I meant a "misogynist" and not "misogyny." Kudos, champ, for harping on an insignificant typo. And as far as the sexism/misogyny goes, I would put it like this - not every sexist is a misogynist, but every misogynist is a sexist. Sexism can include both misandry (not that it's a huge problem) and misogyny, but it's not women-specific. And within the sub-category of misogyny, the prejudices/discriminations are included - but only in the sense that they are directed towards women. I haven't got a clue why you want to omit that from misogyny and solely attribute it to sexism, when one is a variant of the other.
Okay, on the "most relevant point," exactly why are MRAs not misogynists? Men have had more power than women for, um, the KNOWN HISTORY OF TIME. What rights are they actively seeking? Don't they have them all already? The answer, I feel, is as I previously stated - they feel threatened by the advent of gender equality, and they seek to solidify their male privilege though oppression - which is, more or less, an aversion to equality. MRA-ism has evolved to using acts of misogyny to achieve and justify (to themselves) their goals.
Do you want me to define "traditional gender roles?" Feminism and The Women's Rights Movement have begun to erode men's grip on power through demanding equality by eliminating the wage gap, seeking positions of authority, diversify influence, fighting for autonomy over their own bodies, ending sexual assault and harassment, and much more. And with women beginning to penetrate men's stronghold on power, many men are feeling threatened by what they thought was entitled to them because of male privilege. This is, more or less, how MRA-ism was born. The faulty logic that for equality to occur, something must be taken away from them, is prevalent among their ranks.
We do not, on average, share the same gender roles as we had 50 years ago. Men were the ones who worked, and women were expected to stay at home or work lesser jobs for less money. Now, while imperfect and still unequal, the ratio is beginning to shift towards equality with more women holding positions of power and being the major breadwinners for their respective households. Still, women are being oppressed by being denied equal pay for equal jobs, workplace discrimination, sexual harassment, and the threat of losing their control over their own bodies.
And on your third point, perhaps you should explain to me how the ideals of these "current" MRA groups differ from the norm while adhering to equality. Are these some sort of enlightened groups of people who are really just feminists while ironically calling themselves MRAs? I don't get it. By the definition of their group, they're calling for Men's Rights - so what are these rights?
The right to wear a bra? Have fun with that. The right to have a period? Congrats on your newly discovered masochism. The right to make less money than your female counterparts? FedEx me your paycheck and I'll make the necessary adjustments. The right to have the opposite gender tell you what to do with your body? Hire a dominatrix. The right to live under the constant fear of rape? I encourage you to visit your nearest penitentiary. The right to have all of your accomplishments to be dismissed and instead be regarded solely as an object of sexual desire? I can only help you with the former. What rights are men, as a whole, being deprived of that women are allowed to enjoy?
And I think you fully understood my point about generalisations, but I'll elaborate because I'm a sucker for trolls. Yes, they can have validity for scientific studies, buttttt when one starts to make baseless claims about a group of people based on a collective biological trait - I call foul. Examples: women give birth so they must be stay-at-home mothers, she wore a revealing outfit so she was asking for rape, women aren't as physically strong as men so they shouldn't hold positions of power, etc. Basically, any argument that decries women as lesser as men and subsequently asserts that they deserve less because of it.
On the subject of bigotry, a bigot must first decide what to be bigoted about. The identity of the subject is their "evidence," and the baseless prejudice is where the false generalisation of bigotry occurs. Example: I don't like (insert identity) people because of their blah, blah, blah, baseless prejudice. As for me, yeah, I judge bigots. But it's not a prejudice because I'm judging them for their bigotry. It's my "informed" decision to not like bigots because of their bigotry. Prove to me that MRAs aren't bigots and I will stop judging them as bigots. But I don't think you can.
ZDProletariat Alright, boss, I see you've left me here with the beginnings of a novel. I'm afraid I have neither the patience nor the endurance at this late hour to offer a point-by-point rebuttal, and I doubt it would persuade you otherwise - much like your message (which I did read thoroughly) failed to persuade me. Furthermore, I found it interesting how one can use the term "logical fallacy" that often and still manage to prolifically saturate their own arguments with them.
Were this a philosophical debate, I might be interested in continuing it, but it's about social equality - and I'm quite firm with my position on that. I will, however, share with you an article that addresses several of your points, and hopefully this will serve as a suitable conclusion to our whole pseudo-intellectual bout of blathering: time.com/134152/the-toxic-appeal-of-the-mens-rights-movement/
Good day.
But that's no reason to avoid the comments. That a reason to go in and put positive comments that help other rational (read: non-MRA) people feel welcome.
You fucking rule guy. Keep on rockin.
They had one example that was anecdotal... hardly a legitimate basis for ignoring all the evidence that they, surprisingly, acknowledged existed. Though they did gloss over what the 77-83 cent on the dollar number came from. There is a difference between wage and earnings... that 83 cent gap is not a representation for unequal wage... it represent unequal earnings, which, as they mentioned and dismissed, is a result of life choices... which include more than maternity leave, such as, choosing to work less overtime, choosing to work less hours a week, choosing to take more time off... those are all choices women are making even when they don't choose to have children. And none of those choices are wrong, or bad... they just have different priorities and thus make different life choices.
But the point is, it is irrational to fabricate an issue of a patriarchal system negatively discriminating against women... when *_women_* are the cause of the difference in earnings... from their own choices, resulting from their own priorities and free will.
Ikr? It's already illegal to pay women less and men more for the same work. Not only that, but if women were making so much less than men, than why hire so many men? Other than a few here and there as posterboys, why hire men when it's so much cheaper to just hire women?
SteelHime
Since when does discrimination follow logic? Imagine where himanity'd be if women were allowed to join the workplace centuries ago. Wouldn't there be a massive monetary benefit to that? But that's not how that works, now does it?
First time I find myself disappointed with John Oliver's arguments.
hey i ll take a pay cut and gladly give 15 cents per dollar if i can have an extra 8 yrs of life.. woman forget that. just ask a woman if she would like to die 8 yrs before her time.. ok so they have babies. we die earlier.. its called life get over it..
Yep, first video I've hit the dislike button on for LWT. And my tendency to agree with most of his stuff made that hard.
We can cut him some slack. It was 5 years ago.
I find myself disappointed in people like you in the comments.
I can't believe the backlash this video has gotten in the comments- everyone talks about race and how there should be equal opportunity yet cant see why genders should be of the same standard - both are important issues and it's disgraceful that it is still a problem within our society
The video received backlash because of its flawed methodology. Women statistically work less hours, take lower paying jobs and make up less of the national workforce, so ofcourse its going to *look* like women overall make 0.77/$1.00 compared to men, but thats not discrimination, thats a study that doesnt factor in reality.
In a nutshell, theres nothing to fix, and ironically 'fixing' it means screwing over men..
"Sexism" will always be a problem in our society as long as feminists live on.
The difference between racial issues such as Ferguson and this one is that if a white woman were to be treated in the same way black men (or even black women) such as michael brown, the blacklash and hysteria against the cops would be insurmountable. When its black people though, it's business as usual.
Black people and other minorities are struggling to GET IN the employment system, whereas white women are trying to get paid more when their already in, there's a disparity between the two. A recent study showed that white women benefit the most from affirmative actio, funny how that works
Your an idoit that can't debate anyone here.
Meh, this has always been a bit of a "stay out of this discussion or face stupid consequences" topic for me. There is not really a 100% right way to look at this. Both sides have some arguments that are true and both sides say lots of stuff that is horribly wrong. Even John Oliver's video is stupidly biased.
Should women be paid the same? Yes, of course. Is it their and/or societies fault that they are not? Maybe, who knows? Can we even change things so women get paid 100% the same as long as there are lots of braindead morons out there who get to decide over your paycheck?
You know these cars, that can drive over a lake as long as they do it at a stupidly high speed, right? This discussion is a bit like driving one of these cars right towards a giant wall over a shark infested lake. You could either slow down or keep going, but whatever you do, the choice you make is most certainly not 100% the right one.
***** They are most definitely awesome, I can tell you that!
The time will come, very very soon (when robots do all the truly nasty stuff for us,) when the pendulum will swing the other way and women are payed more than men. And it will be for completely uncontrollable reasons. Wonder what the outcry will sound like then?
You mean... like... boats?
Youssof707 I mean like this. Not sure if that's what a boat looks like though.
th-cam.com/video/4oeJjzdlTuI/w-d-xo.htmlm48s
no
No one ever said it was womens fault they get paid less? All that was said was that since women take time out of their careers to raise kids they tend to pick career paths that allow that and that leads to lower pay due to either career choice or less time spent in field. You arent going to offer someone more money who has less to bring to the table.
The only thing credible was the study of 2 identical resume's with different names. Would be more credible if they asked for reasoning why the pay was different.
E. David Healthcare would affect both, maternity leave still hinders them as it still reduces experience, as well as makes women unfavorable to hire because of potential future cost.
Only reasonable thing pointed out is hiring and promoting bias, which would need to be proved on an individual case basis anyway.
E. David The unintended pregnancy and gender bias in hiring and promotions accounts for such a small percent of women I dont think it is really relevant. Personally my mom used to be an assistant principal, but stepped down to be a teacher so she could raise a family and no longer had time for her carrer. Im sure it is just like that with most women.
Don't want to spam this too much, but - yes, women are 100% the reason why they get paid what they get paid.
And I'm a woman. 4thwavers.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/the-wage-gap-myth-explained/
(6:40) that one person absolutely lost their shit when they heard who was on the money
$15 an hour, now we don't need to go to college or get careers. Highschool drop outs, can now make MORE money than most college grads and not be in debt!!! This is amazing. This is how America should be. We should be able to make as much money as the next rich bastard without having to be enslaved by college fees!
*****
oliver disagrees
*****
so is jon stewart. doesn't mean they don't speak fact.
But $15 an hour is such a sad amount...
*****
I know college students who make 13 an hour who've gone 4-7 years. Lol
Democrat4Peace
Well, that's unfortunate. But I guess it's better than being unemployed.
There is legislation. It's the equal pay act. This is an issue of earnings, not wages.
John's dimples are really the cutest thing....
Ah the 77 cents, the most flawed statistic I've seen in a long time
If a 77 cent pay gap is so important to talk about, makes you wonder why they don't address the *massive 90% DEATH gap!*
@@LilacDaisy2 Who the fuck are the 10% that are immortal
David...prove it.
Anyone can make a claim, but not everyone can back it up.
I have zero faith in you, so prove me wrong.
Women are offered less due to the fact that women usually get paternity leave among other things.... lots of other things. Walking lawsuits..
maternity*
Metatron yeh that
That's stupid. You *do* realize that employers don't have to pay women when they take maternity leave, right? Men are also allowed to take paternity leave under FMLA, so your argument doesn't hold water. If men are denied their right to FMLA leave, they are permitted to sue, just as women are. Do you even know what FMLA is?
Squirrel_Of_Mistri yeh coz men are the majority of the people who take FMLA leave...
Twinpact Please present evidence that what you say is true. Last night I searched for gender disparity in numbers of people who took leave, and I couldn't find what I was looking for...so please...prove to me that women take FMLA leave more than men do.
P.S.-- FMLA leave also applies to those who are taking care of family members...it's not just for those who are pushing out babies, or for those who are ailing.
This year, I took 2 months leave in order to take care of my dad while he was dying. I don't consider it a shortcoming on my part, and I was not paid for the time I was on leave. I was a woman taking leave...but I was taking care of a man. So how does that stack up?
Funny how all the top rated comments that claim that John is disregarding facts 'blah blah blah' seem to be blokes, eh...
men being logical - women being emotional - nothing new
How insightful of you...
White knight beta outliers? I don't know whether to be flattered or offended...are you flirting with me?
Cameron Hooper Oh, but try to keep in mind this is _not_ about sexism, but about _facts_, easily proven by the replies you got.
Cameron Hooper
Beta outlier...Ah, he must be talking about the fish. The stereotype that most people own goldfish means that people who own Betas are the outliers. Betas are very pretty fishies.
No, but seriously, despite these posters attempts at "argument" and "logic" your observation is one of the few statements that isn't trolling or rude or based in Dark Ages definitions of "women". I'm tired of going through these and reporting these idiots...then again, I'm in the TH-cam comment section, so methinks I am the biggest idiot here. I'm done with this thread. I'm out. Thank you for being a normal and rational human being. Don't ever change. :)
It's depressing and sad that one the best research teams in journalism couldn't google for 15 and see through this false stat. Oliver is too afraid to challenge his audience on this one.
I'm sorry for all of the terrible comments under this video. I appreciate what you're doing John Oliver
NOT THIS DUMB SHIT AGAIN. The Pay gap has been disproven they don’t take out Over time hours which men tend to do more off so when you account for that it equals $1 to $1. Oh ya and a new recent study by Yale and Harvard both had evidence to prove it didnt exist.
Every now and then even you fuck up John.
E. David He did.
EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK HAS EXISTED FOR DECADES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't know why Obama even mentioned this
Most likely to gain popularity. Although it's an incorrect view, it's widely held, unfortunately.
+jenefer golden He's an idiot
3:59 ???
Annie Andersson Do you really see that as evidence? Really? You think that can compare to legal regulations and investigations done by economists?
Sheesh, all those people giving reasonable explanations about the gender pay gap. So what if men and women with similar qualifications and experience get the same pay? Lets pretend they don't and base a comedy sketch around that.
E. David
Yes. My female colleagues envy me greatly, even though most earn more than me. Aah, privilege.
E. David
God forbid someone encourages people to enjoy humor for a few minutes!
Why do I bother going to the comment section
jack Maher I guess all the studies that prove it’s existence are fake then? Cause I’m pretty sure it’s sadly real
jack Maher also what “uo”?
@@ryanjapan3113 Gender pay gap is BS and here ya goth-cam.com/video/mpE8ttCEd-w/w-d-xo.html
@@ryanjapan3113 and here's a funny one for youth-cam.com/video/Izda5tAgy3s/w-d-xo.html
Haaa aakk it’s not, here YOU go amp.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/nov/08/dispelling-the-myths-why-the-gender-pay-gap-does-not-reflect-the-choices-women-make
I was reading some of the comments and I'm so glad that I'm not an American.. some of you are bashing feminist but yet do you even know what it means? It's the believe that everyone should be treated equal. Of course, there is the extremist that believe women deserve more that man. However, no matter what your talking about there will always be those people. We just need to learn to accept people for who they are (race, gender, sexuality, faith). Like get over your selves..
***** Feminism is about equality, but speaking from the perspective of a woman who does not receive it. It is talking specifically about women's issues that have not yet met the same freedoms as men's.
In order to work on things, we need to specify what they are with terminology.
ZDProletariat If you have questions, seek academic sources. If you can spend hours ranting on here then I'm sure you're more than capable of doing it. Especially since you are not willing to listen to anyone here, including John Oliver and his team.
You need to learn to do proper research, and to gain perspective. Stop relying on anecdotal evidence.
ZDProletariat "I get my information directly from valid sources"
Has no valid sources. Yep, sounds like a typical youtuber!
ZDProletariat Dear youtube troll, you need a life outside of this box.
ZDProletariat lol poor guy.
Where exactly are the sources to where John got this information? 1:26 - There are still many variables to take into account for this,job position, how long they have worked there, lifestyle choices, etc. 2:12 - The gender wage gap has been repeatedly debunked. A study entitled "Graduating to a Pay Gap" by the (AAWU) American Association of University Women (a group that fights for equality for women) even stated that the true percentage of the wage gap shrinks to 7% on page 21 of their report. Why exactly would John Oliver even disagree to a group that is for equality for women. 2:42 - What about "The Equal Pay Act of 1963" signed by John F. Kennedy while the AAWU were there? 2:53 - We are not blaming women. Women have equality for opportunities just as men. Every action that anybody takes has consequences. If women want to work in a cubicle from 9 to 5 and have their husbands play around in the sunshine with their kids just so they can collect a paycheck then that is fine by me. Just don't complain when you've made that choice. 4:11 - "More favorably". Females have taken the majority of positions when it comes to education. There are only 16% of elementary male teachers. Why is there an uproar when women are not getting into STEM fields and not when men are in social service jobs? 4:50 - The same applies to men. Plus women are less likely to negotiate for promotions and raises, explaining the 7% wage gap. This video was full of you asking questions, John. So I have a question for you, "if women were being paid 23% less then men then why don't companies just hire women?"
It is AGAINST the law for a person to be paid more than another person for the exact same job based on gender, race, sexual orientation or religion! If a man works in an office and has the same position as a woman but gets paid more than her, then it's against the law. THAT would then be a reason to go on a crusade. However, this "wage gap" is based on ALL women and ALL men in ALL jobs in the ENTIRE country. Then yes, there is a difference. That difference is quantifiable. Claiming that women should be paid more for having different lower paying jobs than men is just stupid. However, a woman raising a child is different from a woman going off from work for a couple of months to recuperate from giving birth. Those who take maternity leave should be getting full salary for their time away. That is all I would be willing to bend for. But a mother staying home for 10-18 years? How do you want to balance the "wage gap" if women stay at home? Do you want to give them checks in mail?
Let me repeat: It is AGAINST the law for a person to be paid more than another person for the exact same job based on gender, race, sexual orientation or religion!
Actually, in many states it's entirely legal to discriminate against sexual orientation.
You're wrong about the sexual orientation part. One of the biggest reasons why ENDA (job and housing discrimination protection bill for the LGBT population) is failing the Congress is because a mistaken majority thinks that sexual orientation is protected and that passing ENDA would be redundant. Orientation is only protected in 21 states, DC, and a couple of cities and municipalities. Gender identity is only protected in 18 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. That's why the HRC's CEI index is so important - it is a compilation of companies that do protect LGBT workers, even if their states or cities don't.
Funny how in nearly every last week tonight episode, they chose to make a well defined argument and use facts to back it up. But in this one they chose to laugh at the people that look at the statistics in a way that makes sense. And almost everything he made fun of people for was a reasonable argument.
Intellectual dishonesty at its' finest.
There is a difference between the "wage gap" & the "pay gap", one is basically illegal in almost every place on the planet, the other is determined by a no off factors (mostly 2 as discussed by some here)
I think there's a cultural problem. It's socially acceptable in business to pay women less and employers happily make use of the lack of consequences for saving a bit of money. I think women should unionize to get better deals on their employment.
+John Wayne then why dont companies hire all woman then?
Joseph LeForte There are not as many women in the workforce as there are men, so they would have to pay women more to get more women.
Best answer I’ve ever heard:
Reporter: Trump will women get paid the same as men?
President Trump: They will if they do as good of a job
just make a fucking law about this and start inspections
thank you again for bringing awareness to an other important matter
Fun thing is, as far as I know, there is already a law and you can get sued to hell if you pay women less than men is USA.
lifebarier The way it works (or worked) is that if a woman is paid less, she has a certain time to address this and she can ask to get paid equal.
So if a woman notices she's getting paid too little after she already works at a place for a while, she's fcked.
For example if there's no males working the same job for the same amount of hours with the same experience and education, she can't compare and is fcked.
Darckense Onoda
I think your example is bad. If there is no one to compare to , how does it count as getting discriminated against and getting fucked? Unless there is a formula of some sort , that companies must follow , when determining what the wage should be.People get paid what they are offered , as long as its higher or equal to minimum wage. So in the case of not having a coworker to compare to , a person is not discriminated against. That person simply chose a job with bad salary.
And you can't compare people that are from different places of employment yet in same positions ,as they offer different salaries and employment benefits.
And i'm not putting words in your mouth the last point is just for anyone else reading.
Dante Arhiwolf "If there is no one to compare to , how does it count as getting discriminated against"
It would when later on a male person gets a same job with same credentials.
But it's hard, it's hard to compare, since so many things like experience are calculated for. Why is experience calculated for, I have no clue. I am for equal pay for equal work.
And you are right different work, (maybe) different pay.
well from the government point of view there is nothing else you can do, if they finished school and they are already doushbags who do this kind of thing, i can't think of anything else woman can do
Show me a woman who works on an oil rig and doesn't make as much as the men who work there.
literally every woman who works on an oil rig
Face palm
Letitia Wandler i said show me one, i require evidence
Wolf Win are u a furry
Letitia Wandler does it even matter?
We all deserve equal respect in society
brajamtho757 I respect everybody, and I agree about stopping the cutting
brajamtho757 but sexual assault is not just for females.
If wage discrimination is so prevalent, where are all the lawsuits?
JamievsJamie your comment is what we call “losing an argument”
JamievsJamie I forget just how nice and civilized people are on the internet
@JamievsJamie stop projecting you moron. The gender pay gap doesn't exist when you're comparing the same job and working hours.
If corporations interested in making money could get away with paying women less, then why do they hire so many men?
I'm assuming it's because more woman stay home and take care of their children, yes even now, then men do. Generally men find jobs and woman will stay home with the kids if necessary. It also can depend on the certain job, for example I seem to see quite a bit more woman doing things like teaching and working at call centers.
+Brandon Encinas then wouldn't that be a factor in the wage gap?
I've lost some respect for this guy!
6:44 I think I found the Battlestar Galactica fan.
He said it himself: the average female worker compared to the average male worker, NOT based on the same job.
What I think he meant was, the average female worker working the same job as an average male worker
Really disappointed in this video. He really has put out some quality stuff on other topics. Maybe he should stick to covering topics that wouldn't turn half of his viewer base on the other.
My comment is on the level of controversy generated. I do have a problem with unfair pay, but it has nothing to do with the video. The comment section does a pretty good job covering the reasons why there is a gap - perceived or otherwise.
Commentary is fine. What he did was pick a topic with enough controversy as to be compared to the struggle between atheists and theists. This doesn't make for comedy. It brings out the worst in people and it's simply not entertaining.
If a person wants to be paid the same as me for the same job and can display the same level of competence, I would stand up for that person's right to ask for an equal wage.
See what I did above? It doesn't require the use of sex/gender. When the language used to fight for good ideas is tainted by toxic, inflammatory verbiage, no progress is made - None. If I don't seem like I'm laughing, it's because I take freedom, equality, and responsibility very seriously.
I know you don't which is why you're posting a counter-productive comment on a TH-cam video. But that's cool. I respect your right to express yourself. But don't confuse 'brittle egos' with 'this shit isn't funny... where'd the funny shit go?'
e nd i ve seen your comments and your default seems to be that its brittle fragile egos.other than that you dont make any argument.why dont you inspect what the detracters are saying and stop being so stuck up your self
Usually enjoy this show, but this segment was brazenly idiotic. I understand it's a comedy show, but when you ignore pertinent details, it kind of ruins your ability to make an argument. If a situation does exist, then you have to account for both sides of the issue when making an argument. Otherwise the side you're supposedly trying to convince is going to rightfully tune you out. In short, this segment made the show seem like a distorted mirror of Fox News.
cool pic bro, and yes, john oliver is sometimes wrong about things.
I had a look at that "John and Jennifer" study and it is very dodgy. For example, at one point in the study, under the 'Materials and Methods' section it says "Indeed, we were particularly careful to obtain a sample representative of the underlying population, because many past studies have demonstrated that when this is the case, respondents and nonrespondents typically do not differ on demographic characteristics and responses to focal variables (47)." *Many past studies, respondents do not differ.* So essentially they kept taking the in different ways until it turned in the results they wanted. I'll just let that sink in.
He should make a video on the workplace fatality gap.
Well men chose their job knowing the risk,
I know, you're not going to listen to me, but: The list of White House staff and their wages are being reported to congress. You can read them online. Two women are listed as earning $0. Don't you think this might skew the average by a substantial margin? It doesn't say weather these two female staffers get their payment from another party, neither does it say how many hours every staffer works for the posted wage, or what their qualifications are.
It is not enough to simply say, 'These women get less money.' You have to look at the kind of work and the hours. Women tend to choose careers that don't pay as much as working in a STEM field does. On average, they also work fewer hours than men in the same line of work do. It's not because they are dumb or lazy, but because they generally choose to have children.
I'm gonna be a little pedantic for a moment, because I'm like that, and tell you that the spelling in this situation is "whether," not "weather." You're talking meteorology, friend.
That's okay. Noticed that myself after posting. It's good to know when you're mistaken. Give it a try, Oliver!
"Finally, a word about the infamous “wage gap,” which represents one of the most long-standing statistical fallacies in American policy debate. The 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure, or hours worked per week. When mainstream economists consider the wage gap, they find that pay disparities are almost entirely the result of women’s different life preferences-what men and women choose to study in school, where they work, and how they balance their home and career. A thorough 2009 study by the US Department of Labor examined more than fifty peer-reviewed papers on the subject and concluded that the wage gap “may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” 60 In addition to differences in education and training, the review found that women are more likely than men to leave the workforce to take care of children or older parents. There were so many differences in pay-related choices that the researchers were unable to specify even a residual effect that might be the result of discrimination. Wage-gap activists at the AAUW and the National Women’s Law Center say no-even when we control for relevant variables, women still earn less. But it always turns out that they have omitted one or two crucial variables. Consider the case of pharmacists. Almost half of all pharmacists are female, yet as a group, they earn only 85 percent of what their male counterparts earn. Why should that be? After all, male and female pharmacists are doing the same job with roughly identical educations. There must be some hidden discrimination at play. But according to the 2009 National Pharmacies Workforce Survey , male pharmacists work on average 2.4 hours more per week, have more job experience, and more of them own their own stores. 61 A 2012 New York Times article tells a similar story about women in medicine: “Female doctors are more likely to be pediatricians than higher-paid cardiologists. They are more likely to work part time. And even those working full time put in seven percent fewer hours a week than men. They are also much more likely to take extended leaves, most often to give birth and start a family.” 62 There are exceptions, but most workplace pay gaps and glass ceilings vanish when one accounts for these factors. And as economists frequently remind us, if it were really true that an employer could get away with paying Jill less than Jack for the same work, clever entrepreneurs would fire all their male employees, replace them with females, and enjoy a huge market advantage. Women’s groups do occasionally acknowledge that the pay gap is largely explained by women’s life choices, as the AAUW does in its 2007 Behind the Pay Gap. 63 But this admission is qualified: they insist that women’s choices are not truly free. Women who decide, say, to stay home with children, to become pediatricians rather than cardiologists, or to attend the Fashion Industry High School rather than Aviation High are driven by sexist stereotypes. Says the AAUW, “Women’s personal choices are . . . fraught with inequities.” 64 It speaks of women being “pigeonholed” into “pink-collar” jobs in health and education. According to the National Organization for Women, powerful sexist stereotypes “steer” women and men “toward different education, training, career paths,” and family roles. 65 But is it really sexist stereotypes and social conditioning that best explain women’s vocational preferences and their special attachment to children? Aren’t most American women free and self-determining human beings? The women’s groups need to show -not dogmatically assert-that women’s choices are not free. And they need to explain why, by contrast, the life choices they promote are the authentic ones-what women truly want, and what will make them happier and more fulfilled. Of course, these are weighty philosophical questions unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. But surely, one thing should be clear: ignoring boys’ educational deficits is not the solution to the wage and power gap. And whatever women’s problems may be, they should not blind us to the growing plight of marginally educated men."
- Christina Hoff Sommers. The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies Are Harming Our Young Men.
I was about to complain that you wrote a paragraph. But then I saw that you had quoted CHS, so I can't complain :)
@Ramsey Bolton actually came from a woman originally.
I would love for someone to do a wage analysis for his staff.
Dear John,
Why did you abandon the skepticism you advocated regarding scientific studies and only consider the statistics that confirm your preconceptions?
You can work harder, dig a little deeper AND still be entertaining and funny. You have done numerous times and I wish you stay the course.
Kind regards
If you could pay Jennifer $4000 less for the same job, why isn't the workforce flooded with women? And being a woman with children usually dose have a larger impact on your career than if you are a guy with children. Because you have to take a few months off for maternity leave, recovery, nursing, maybe taking care of the baby, eyc. You don't get to 'choose' if you are the only gender that has to get pregnant, but it's a fact, and nobody is saying you HAVE to have children, it's your choice, but if you make that choice, it will affect you. not because there is male oppression in the work force, but because of your own choices
Purposefully discriminating hiring by gender is very illegal. Said company would be buried into the ground before they could say "Equality Act"
I mean they're probably taking the guy on while paying him more as a result of believing him to be intrinsically 'better' within the study scenario so there's another gotcha in the heap
Wtf are you talking about? If women don't have children the human species will end??? Just because a woman wants to further the human species doesn't mean she deserves to be payed any less. The reason why the workforce isn't flooded with woman with the are payed less is because work forces favor men and feel they are more deserving of money. The wage gap is still alive, it may be over exaggerated from time to time but unfortunately still a thing.
I mean I've heard here and there that people get mad discrimination on the basis of 'could they be pregnant in the next 5 years' which in itself is fairly discriminatory; whether you're sick, pregnant or need psychiatric treatment companies need to give a shit about their workers. Studies have shown that men's wages increase after having kids and nobody asks whether they're going to have them (vlog brothers break this whole wage gap thing down pretty well).
Which would seem like a move a company would make for its profits but again that's just corporate culture looking out for its bottom line.
Lack of any parental leave along with the economic necessity and basic human desire of either sex to pursue a career is fucking Japan's birth rate up something good.
Hey John. The wage gap study doesn't factor for hours worked or job choice. Don't you think those would be some important factors to account for?
they failed to look critically at the statistics they kept mentioning. As a reporter you look at the numbers form the institutions that give you these ridiculous findings of 77 cents and deduce reasonable correlations based on what the gap could be responsible for. Everybody seems to forget that women and men generally dont work the same jobs. Tahts the biggest aspect to look at and take into consideration. There arent a lot of female coal miner, fishermen, and loggers and there arent many male nurses or daycare staff members. These discrepancies in job selection out of university is the reason why women are not being paid the same. No matter if you control for education and hours work you still have to look at it from the vantage point of them working the exact same job. Youll be surprised to find there isnt a wage gap at all.
I agree with you, and I'm a girl. Most of this gender gap crap is nonexistent.
What you said about men and women in different jobs , I'm not sure. If a girl is a cola miner she should be paid the same as the guy. If a guy is a daycare employee he should be paid the same as the girl.
It isn't very visible
AndreSaysHello no thats what i meant i was just saying that we dont find women in certain jobs and neither do we find men. And thats because of the choices we make.
I'd really like to have shoeonheads button now.
Who?
@@richardpotatoa.k.adicktate4749 shoeonhead. A youtuber
@@linocaz I don't know who this shoe hand is
@@richardpotatoa.k.adicktate4749 You're better off _not_ knowing. IMO she should be Long Island's least prized chunk of protoplasm.