As often commented here (1, 2 , 3) the gender pay gap has literally been a stick to beat men for decades and is whipped out whenever anyone challenges the anti-male feminists about their hatred of men.
Whenever they raise the 'gap issue' it is always on the basis of discrimination against women even though there is no proof and there has never been that systematically a women with the same talent, skill, years of experience, adding the same value and undertaking the same job at the same company has ever been discriminated.
Never any mention of women taking career breaks to bring up children because they and their husband/partner have made an adult and mature decision to do so, or the fact that many women choose the job security/regular hours of the public sector over the private sector. The latter being able to pay higher wages.
The issue of career breaks is anathema to modern-day anti-male feminists who see women who want to stay at home and bring up their children as old-fashioned and victims of old skool (sic) patriarchy. There is no better explanation of why the misuse of the gender pay gap is wrong then this pamphlet.
All the arguments anti-male feminists trot out is that "Men get paid x% more than women". Their misuse of statistics would shame a five year old.
The latest ONS gender pay gap figures showed that for full-time employees it fell from 12.2% to 10.2%. For part-time employees (dominated by women) it is now -4% (i.e. part-time women get paid more than part-time men) and overall, the gap is 19.8% down from 22%. The median full-time figure is the one ONS rightly uses.
When the figures came out there were general comments (BBC, Telegraph, Telegraph 2, The Guardian). Some business leaders questioned why with the gap narrowing the government needed to bring in equality laws.
Still just because the gap is closing does not mean the anti-male feminists will stop. The government's 'equalities' department said it was still committed to "taking measures to end discrimination in the workplace" - bring on the gender pay audits and positive discrimination! How is this liberal and how is this conservative?
The crucial statistic which highlights decades of educational failure is the one regarding the wages of young men and women.
The figures showed (page 8) that women aged 22-29 earned more than men of the same age. Full-time it was 2.1% and at 1.9% for part-time. This was highlighted in articles in the Daily Mail and The Independent, whilst our old friend Barbara Ellen ranted away.
What this shows is that the gender education gap (1 and 2) is now filtering through to employment as this site and others have always said it would. The move from exam-based O-levels to course based GCSE's, the feminisation of the education system (no male teachers and dumbed down curriculum) and the continual demonisation of boys is as expected leading to lower employment choices and chances for men when they enter the workplace. The Daily Telegraph research of two years ago highlighted this clearly.
But there is just silence from the government on this, Michael Gove (the education secrertary) says nothing to address it whilst Theresa May and equalities minister and hieress, Lynne Featherstone, says we want even more rules to help women.
The new figures show clearly the effect of poor educational attainment of boys yet there is just silence on it and even though there is now clear and unequivocal proof of its effects.
As well as this of course is the fact that if suddenly a figure moved from being pro-female (like a +ve gender pay gap figure) to being negative (like a -ve gender pay gap figure) then there would be acres of comment from politicians but there is just silence.
Dr Catherine Hakim (1 and 2) is a voice that stands out in this field and her forthcoming report "Feminist Myths and Magic Medicine" will be a joy to read.
Posted by Skimmington
Additional info: here is another article about Dr Catherine Hakim
Note how Barbera Ellen celebrates that young women earn more than young men.
Everything is just as we always expected - when men earn more that's wrong, but when the roles are reversed its' not just acceptable but something to celebrate. She's a female supremacist and I called her as much in the comments section of her article (top rated comment too so I can't be far wrong)
Posted by: John Kimble | Monday, 20 December 2010 at 01:28
Married… divorced… separated… never together… what does any relationship status have to do with a man's parental duty? Once you’re a father, you're always a father. There is no you in the formula of life anymore. There is always at least one other person standing beside you in that equation. Always. Own that. And never leave that behind.
Posted by: Single Dad | Monday, 20 December 2010 at 11:51
For 30 years it has been fairly easy to see the feminisation of the West.Look at education, public sector employment, prison sentencing etc. Men are relegated to the lowest of the low, outside of our ruling elite that is. God forbid that the likes of Mr Dromney(male winner of a female only seat) should ever suffer discrimination.
Then look at the video clip of the young woman receiving 53 lashes for some misdemeanour in the Sudan.
Will it come to pass in Britain that Sharia law takes precedence? 100 years of feminism, R.I.P.
The downfall of feminism brought about by the likes of the man hating harman and her desire to court her non western constituents.
Posted by: J. MacKie | Monday, 20 December 2010 at 14:23