If you keep telling the same untruth long enough and it is not adequately challenged, then it becomes a fact. This can easily be applied to one of the key battlefronts opened up against men, the gender pay gap.
The Equalities and Human Rights Commission has called for the repeal of the 1975 Equal Pay Act because it is not 'fit for purpose' (link).
What the Commission really means is that because the 17% Gender PayGap can easily be proven to be about lifestyle choice (see previous links here and here) and not sexual discrimination, as the Commission and the anti-male industry proclaim, it is time to rip up laws and invent new ones to 'prove' it is because of sexual discrimination. All on the taxpayer of course, as the Commission is made from the public purse.
What makes the situation worse is the clear spin from Nicola Brewer, the Chief Executive of the Commission.
She quotes the overall figure of 17.1% and the part-time figure of 36.6% yet single women, as they get older, earn more than single men. Or that, Black Caribbean women earn more than their male equivalent. No mention of the granularity in the statistics.
The Commission has launched this on the back of the forthcoming Equalities Bill which will entrench firmly into law, that it is Ok for men to be discriminated against and the Commission which is meant to be about equality is firmly on board.
Yes there is a subtle agenda in a lot of discussions about pay. There were a few reports on "research" (for a life insurance co.) Healining that full time mothers do £33,000 of unpaid work a year. Most reports then went on to note fathers did £23,000 of unpaid work. Of course the gloss but on this was generally that men do less. However the Fathers are also in full time employment (perhaps research done prior to the recession) making it rather unsurprising that mothers do "40 per cent" more household work.
So taking the average wage to be £25,000 a year plus the £23,000 of unpaid work then the fathers contribution is £48,000 p.a.!
Now there is a headline one wouldn't see
Posted by: Nigel | Wednesday, 18 March 2009 at 21:51