Huge Occupational Differences by Gender Exist. Is That By Choice or Is It Gender Discrimination?
| Occupation Category | Percent Female |
|---|---|
| Management and Professional | 51.5% |
| Service | 56.8% |
| Sales and Office | 62.9% |
| Farming, Fishing, Forestry, Construction and Maintenance | 4.6% |
| Production, Transportation and Material Moving | 21.2% |
Source: BLS
The table above shows the percent of female workers in 5 major occupation categories, based on data for 2010 just released by the BLS (Table 11). Women are over-represented in the first three categories listed above, and under-represented in the last two.
Am I just being a total sexist, or is it possible that women might actually disproportionately prefer work environments that are relatively safe, indoors, air-conditioned, not physically demanding, and comfortable (office jobs) and men disproportionately tolerate work environments that are relatively unsafe (see CD post about the 12:1 male-female occupational fatality ratio), outdoors, and physically demanding (farming, fishing, logging, manufacturing, roofing, oil rig workers, etc.)? And if labor markets compensate workers with wage premiums for unsafe, uncomfortable, and physically demanding work, could that explain some of the observed gender-based wage differences? Or do any observed gender disparities, e.g. occupational differences, reflect conscious or unconscious sex discrimination?
Am I just being a total sexist, or is it possible that women might actually disproportionately prefer work environments that are relatively safe, indoors, air-conditioned, not physically demanding, and comfortable (office jobs) and men disproportionately tolerate work environments that are relatively unsafe (see CD post about the 12:1 male-female occupational fatality ratio), outdoors, and physically demanding (farming, fishing, logging, manufacturing, roofing, oil rig workers, etc.)? And if labor markets compensate workers with wage premiums for unsafe, uncomfortable, and physically demanding work, could that explain some of the observed gender-based wage differences? Or do any observed gender disparities, e.g. occupational differences, reflect conscious or unconscious sex discrimination?
17 Comments:
Is it possible to look at the gender wage gap in just those occupations where they are semi-equally represented? In particular, Service and Management and Professional?
Is it possible some of both. Women choose certain jobs because more of them are made available. Or because the barriers to entry are high on some other jobs?
And it may well be that most women just choose not to do certain jobs.
What evidence is there that labor markets are efficient? I sure don't see much.
Mark Perry,
Am I just being a total sexist, or is it possible that women might actually disproportionately prefer
Mark, this has been discussed thousands of times for decades.
For starters, Men are 93% of workplace deaths, and women are 7%.
What you need to realize is that women/feminists make the 'pay gap' claim not because they have any interest in being fair, but because whining for handouts WORKS.
If you read some of the seduction/pickup blogs, you will recognize this aspect of female behavior as a 'test'.
Women do not expect to be taken seriously when they make some absurd claim like this. Rather, they are FILTERING for men who cave to the absurd demand, vs. men who dismiss it or brush it aside humorously (ideal), so that women can know which men to be attracted to.
Even women don't expect their own claims to be taken seriously. They are just testing to see which men are pushovers and which ones are worth being attracted to.
Mark,
Please read 'The Misandry Bubble'.
If you are annoyed with what feminists are doing with this 'pay gap' myth, you will be appalled to see what they have done to the judiciary and how they stripped men of many basic rights.
A simple question: If I am a profit maximizing capitalist, why would I pay 30 to 50 percent more to hire a similarly productive male?
why would I pay 30 to 50 percent more to hire a similarly productive male?
The part that I bolded answers the question. It is 'politically incorrect' to state the fact that women are less productive than men.
"What evidence is there that labor markets are efficient? I sure don't see much"...
Can you say government interference hydra?
Why do women go into managment?
Because on the job they can't carry their end of the log but they sure do know how critisize those who can't...
Let's switch to a single gender neutral pronoun. Then all sexual differences and proclivities will cease to exist.
Haven't we beat this dead horse enough. Somewhere along the line most folks have accepted the pretty obvious fact that men and women are different. Each culture and at different times in history those differences are pushed in different directions. I'm just happy there are differences - if not we would all be grumpy old men.
Juandos, one reason we have government interference is that markets have proven over and over to be neither efficient nor fair. That, and corporate interests ask for and get interference, are whirlpool.
At the same time, other special interests like sierra club create opposing imbalances by demanding market controls that have valid reasons but which are overstated and overenacted.
It is an oversimplification to blame everything on government interference, as if such interference isn't demanded by ourselves.
I submit that it is more accurate to say that we have not yet agreed upon a system that measures and provides feedback to market controls. Sure, you will say that is what the market is for: to provide that feedback. But, the reason you need controls or interference is precisely that the market is not good at providing or responding to necessary changes.
What we need is a second level of market, in which those that demand interference openly pay for the benefits they get.
Yeah, all the women I know want to tear drown auto transmissions and go to bed with black grease under their fingernails. Their desires are thwarted by men, who do not want a bunch of babes working alongside them in the machine shops.
I can always count on the hydra for pure, unadulterated baloney: "Juandos, one reason we have government interference is that markets have proven over and over to be neither efficient nor fair. That, and corporate interests ask for and get interference, are whirlpool"...
Somehow with all the people on this site who've made an effort to educate you about 'crony capitalism' you still get it confused with the market...
"...other special interests like sierra club create opposing imbalances by demanding market controls that have valid reasons"...
What's valid about a collection tree huggers & root kissers that are still pushing climate change hoax?
"...as if such interference isn't demanded by ourselves"...
Who are these clueless people hydra?
"I submit that it is more accurate to say that we have not yet agreed upon a system that measures and provides feedback to market controls"...
Well I submit that you're wrong again and that market feed back control is called, 'price' of a good or service provided...
"What we need is a second level of market, in which those that demand interference openly pay for the benefits they get"...
Yeah, just like Custer needed another indian at Little Big Horn...
"Juandos, one reason we have government interference is that markets have proven over and over to be neither efficient nor fair. That, and corporate interests ask for and get interference, are whirlpool."
Government intervention to support the likes of whirlpool is government intervention and not a sign of the inefficiency of free markets
Gale says: "If I am a profit maximizing capitalist, why would I pay 30 to 50 percent more to hire a similarly productive male?"
Yes, racism, sexism, or nepotism by a firm will place it at a competitive disadvantage.
WTF?!?!
Where did my original response to hydra's comment about needing government interference go?
"What we need is a second level of market, in which those that demand interference openly pay for the benefits they get"...
Yeah hydra, just like Custer needed another indian at Little Big Horn...
As Daniel Tosh said, "It's not sexist if it's always true."
Actually he said "racist," but whatever.
Post a Comment
<< Home