The Instigator
fdsa
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Sarra
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Feminists are being intellectually dishonest when arguing about the existence of a "gender pay gap".

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/14/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 700 times Debate No: 79618
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

fdsa

Pro

Round 1 is the challenge and acceptance phase. The remaining rounds are going to be arguing the point. My position is in the affirmative. That the gender pay exists but the reason isn't because of discrimination.

I look forward to having this debate.
Sarra

Con

I accept. I am going to explain my mother's situation (she works for the state of North Carolina) in this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
fdsa

Pro

When you type "define feminism" in to google the response is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." It is my belief that this definition no longer applies to what is now known as "3rd wave" feminism who use the "gender pay gap" argument, among others, as reason for how they are "oppressed".

"The "77 cents" formulation is a colloquialism"shorthand for expressing a complex economic truth. Simply put, what it conveys is the fact that, if you average out what all women, working full time, year round, earn and compare that number to what all men working full time, year round, earn, you find that women take home 77 percent of what men do." - Sarah Jane Glynn Center for American Progress

The statistics used to "prove" the gender pay gap is incredibly misleading. The Department of Labor's study does not break down which professions these racial/gender groups belong too, their positions, or longevity of their respective careers. Because a senior engineer who has worked for Lockheed Martin for 15 years, logically is going to make more than a clinical social worker working for a DCF for 2 years. Both are white collar positions, while the pay is going to be significantly different.

The Consad report worked in those controls, among others, and found that the pay gap narrows to 93%-95%. Giving credence to the fact that the 77% wage is a result of the different choices women make in their careers and raising families. Engineers simply make more money than social workers and the grand majority of those majoring in gender studies. Any difference in wages of similar men and women of equality qualifications is explained by women's avoidance in salary negotiations, as told by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

There is not a supreme patriarchy conspiring to artificially hold women's wages down and oppressing them.

You are likely going to surmise that because of your mother's experience, that a gender pay gap exists. That is going to be pure conjecture, and very hard to authenticate. That individual experience is not indicative or prove a systemic problem.
Sarra

Con

Since this debate is about facts and not opinions, let"s get some facts straight. The "77 cents" formulation is not based on mean (average) or mode (most common number). The "77 cents" formulation is based on the median (middle) earner of Americans who filed data during the 2010 United States Census. The middle earner of women made 23% less money when compared to the middle earner of men (nationwide) [1]. Figure 2.4 on page 21 illustrates pay gap by education levels of the median (middle) earners. Table 2.4 on page 30 and table 2.5 on page 32 illustrate pay gap by industry and occupation (respectively) by showing the median (middle) earner. This data is slightly extrapolated on Table B2.7 on page 45.

The median (median) earner is more important than the mean (average) of all workers, because almost all executives in almost all businesses are males. These males would skew the results of a mean (average) of all workers based on gender.

The Consad Report is extremely bias (right of center). I contest that Pro is being intellectually dishonest in his/her assertions of the wage gap specifically by using an extremely bias source. (It would be like me calling a report from Salon.com moderate and fair).

Sources:
[1]: http://statusofwomendata.org...
Debate Round No. 2
fdsa

Pro

The CONSAD report was commissioned by the US Department of Labor. Whose Mission statement implies that this government agency is working for the benefit of everyone in our society, men and women alike. [1]

You say that the CONSAD report is inherently biased, without giving any proof for that argument. The first paragraph below the mission statement of The Institute for Women"s Policy Research, the source you cited, explicitly says their goal is to "address the needs of women" and "use women-oriented policy research" [2]. As a result, their report is inherently biased because they have a vested interest in its results. That is intellectual dishonesty. Even after reading their report, they still did not break wages down by earnings of men and women in the same industry. But it did break down the amount of women in the industry, versus men. Which could imply that they had the data that broke gender wages down, by industry. They simply could have chosen not to publish that information because it would have blown Meteor Crater-sized holes in their research. Though that is pure conjecture, based on the facts at hand. In the end, they simply used men and women's full-time wages. Which is disingenuous and obviously is not painting the whole picture.

To address your first paragraph, the choices women make cause them to earn less. Let's examine two industries, engineering and education. Women earned 18% of the engineering degrees and 81% of the education degrees, in 2008 [3]. Average earnings of those in engineering is $48493 and the average earnings of education is $33180 [3]. Now because women earn fewer engineering degrees and earn more of the education degrees. The women's wage median is going to be deflated because most of the earnings within the data are going to be inherently lower because of the fields women chose to go in to. This same study also goes in to other factors such as number of hours worked & jobs worked within an industry. A 3rd of the wage gap is "unexplained", but is explained by fact that women do not negotiate their salaries [4].

No discrimination in STEM hiring either, which has in inherently higher wages than most other industries. Women are hired 2 to 1 against identically qualified men. [5]

Vote Pro, because Con seems more interested in using conjecture, than proving my points wrong using facts. I will admit that citing Sarah Jane Glynn's paragraph was a mischaracterization of the method in which the Department of Labor disseminated its data. Saying they used mean, instead of median. Regardless, my points are valid. The wage gap is a result of women's choices in degrees and ensuing careers, not institutional sexism driving women's wages down.

Sources:
[1] www.dol.gov/opa/aboutdol/mission.htm
[2] www.iwpr.org/about
[3] www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-women-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf
[4] www.nber.org/digest/apr13/w18511.html
[5] www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract
Sarra

Con

"The following report prepared by CONSAD Research Corporation"" TCR is full of strawman arguments. "There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap"A greater percentage of women than men tend to work part-time. Part-time work tends to pay less than full-time work."; "A greater percentage of women than men tend to leave the labor force for child birth, child care and elder care. Some of the wage gap is explained by the percentage of women who were not in the labor force during previous years, the age of women, and the number of children in the home."; "Women, especially working mothers, tend to value "family friendly" workplace policies more than men. Some of the wage gap is explained by industry and occupation, particularly, the percentage of women who work in the industry and occupation." Etc.

Pro states: "Even after reading their report, they still did not break wages down by earnings of men and women in the same industry." p. 30

Pro: "In the end, they simply used men and women's full-time wages. Which is disingenuous and obviously is not painting the whole picture." p. 26

Pro: "Now because women earn fewer engineering degrees and earn more of the education degrees. The women's wage median is going to be deflated because most of the earnings within the data are going to be inherently lower because of the fields women chose to go in to." In engineering, women compose 26% of the workforce and earn 82% of men. In education, women compose 74% of the workforce and earn 79% of men [5].

Pro: "A 3rd of the wage gap is "unexplained", but is explained by fact that women do not negotiate their salaries [4]." " "the authors' findings appear to be consistent with past research suggesting that women are at least as likely to negotiate as men when face-to-face communication with other parties is limited." " disproven by Pro"s own link [1].

Pro contests STEM has no wage discrimination by analyzing college professors. When we analyze actual employees of STEM, we find a roughly 18% wage gap between men and women [5].

The US DOL has a myth and fact page. "Myth: the wage gap is much smaller than 77%. Fact: wage gap based on annual earnings is 77%" [2]. "The wage gap varies considerably across occupations" occupational segregation, just like wage discrimination, is an issue of inequality" [3]. "When women are not paid fairly, not only do they suffer, but so do their families" [4].

Feminism positions are in line with the US Department of Labor. The US Department of Labor data is not dishonest, therefore feminism positions are not dishonest.

Sources
[1] http://www.nber.org...
[2] http://blog.dol.gov...
[3] https://blog.dol.gov...
[4] http://www.dol.gov...
[5] http://www.dol.gov...
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
hmmmm how to condense down a 5,000 character post to 3,000 characters....
Posted by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
kasmic's debate is taking up an unreasonable amount of my time (research).
Posted by fdsa 2 years ago
fdsa
Are you going to respond Sarra?
Posted by fdsa 2 years ago
fdsa
So, I wonder if they are going to respond.
Posted by FrozenLichBox 2 years ago
FrozenLichBox
Usually I can think up reasonable arguments for both sides of an issue. This one though, has no rational argument to support the negative side.

One thing that annoys me is that a lot of debates (this one included) are factual in nature, and you literally can't argue with facts.
Posted by Pravdah 2 years ago
Pravdah
Damn it, I would argue, but then I'd have to call up one of my friends on the other side of the debate for counterarguments because I totally agree with this.
No votes have been placed for this debate.