The Feminist demand for “equal pay” has been around since the 19th century and the advent of first wave Feminism (Davis), while second wave Feminists pushed for the passage of The Equal Pay Act in the United States in 1963 (EEOC) and in the United Kingdom in 1970 (legislation.gov.uk). Despite this legislation making paying women less than men for the same work illegal for at least 45 years, third wave Feminism has been pushing the narrative of the “Gender Pay Gap” aggressively and continuously (AAUW, 2015).
Many others have articulated how the “gender pay gap” is a myth, caused by the choices women make, namely: having children, working fewer hours, entering lower paying but more stable industries, getting degrees in useless fields like gender studies, and a laundry list of other factors that have nothing to do with women being oppressed or held down by sexist men or “the patriarchy”.
Rather than exhume the horse from the grave only to beat on it some more, let’s take a more positive approach, and look at the “progress” being made by Feminists in narrowing the “pay gap”.
A new “study” from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, which looked at the “progress” of different states in narrowing the pay gap, estimated that the gap will be eliminated in some states by 2058. The title of the most progressive state was claimed by Washington DC, followed by Maryland (Zadrozny, 2015). Another study regarding which states had the smallest “gender pay gap” by the American Association of University Women placed Washington DC at number one as well, followed by Maryland at number two (Hill, 2014).
What is Washington DC doing to cause them to take the gold in not one, but two studies? The Washington Post gives the answer…
“So why did Washington lead the pack? The answer likely lies with the federal government’s hiring policies, according to the study” (Jayakumar, 2015)
The Washington Post article mentions that although all employers must abide by the Equal Employment Opportunity laws, the federal government goes above and beyond them by discriminating against men, or as it’s often put, “extending opportunities to women” (Jayakumar, 2015). It has been illegal to discriminate based on sex for 45 years. However it’s clear that when men and women compete on an even playing field, men win. If sexism or gender discrimination was the problem, women could sue the employers; so clearly, it’s not discrimination, but a lack of qualifications on the part of women. Thus the only solution is to discriminate against men while calling it equality by invoking the magic word of “diversity”.
The necessity of “affirmative discrimination” is proof-positive that women are (on average) less qualified than their male counterparts, and must be the beneficiaries of discrimination in order to be employed at the federal government (or any other employer with a diversity/male discrimination program) at the levels that they are.
According to Forbes, a study was conducted in 2014 which tested the results of diversity and affirmative discrimination programs. The results were that gender discrimination drove away top talent for both women and men. Talented women didn’t want to work in a company with discriminatory practices, even if they benefited from them. 70% of those involved in the study, of which 52% were female and 48% were male, stated that discrimination undermined the importance of merit and led to unintended consequences (Data Freaks, 2014). Some of these unintended consequences included women being 29% more likely to stigmatize each other for their success, and attribute it to preferential treatment rather than merit (Data Freaks, 2014).
The unspoken reality is that while 70% of the respondents did not favor discrimination against men for the sake of diversity, the remaining 30% of the respondents obviously did favor it. This 30% surely includes the talentless women and Feminists that must rely of discrimination in order to get ahead. In fact Feminists would like nothing more than to expand quotas and male discrimination to include elected political positions (Rampell, 2009).
Feminists hate a meritocracy. In fact they deny the concept of a meritocracy entirely (Heart, 2008), and go so far as to blame “the patriarchy” for their own incompetence (Restructure!, 2010). These are the women who benefit from male discrimination and “affirmative action”, not the talented women, but the hopeless whiners, which also happen to be the people the federal government is aggressively hiring.
Explains a lot doesn’t it?
AAUW. (2015). The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap (Spring 2015). Retrieved June 11, 2015, from American Association of University Women: http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/
Data Freaks. (2014, October 16). Gender Quotas in Hiring Drive Away Both Women and Men. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/datafreaks/2014/10/16/gender-quotas-in-hiring-drive-away-both-women-and-men/
Davis, M. (n.d.). An Historical Introduction to the Campaign for Equal Pay. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from Union History: http://www.unionhistory.info/equalpay/roaddisplay.php?irn=820
EEOC. (n.d.). The Equal Pay Act of 1963. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/epa.cfm
Heart. (2008, January 25). White Privilege, the Meritocracy Myth, and Perfect Feminists, Perfect Women. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from Women’s Space: https://womensspace.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/white-privilege-the-meritocracy-myth-and-perfect-feminists-perfect-women/
Hill, A. (2014, April 7). The best and worst states on closing the gender pay gap. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from Marketplace: http://www.marketplace.org/topics/economy/best-and-worst-states-closing-gender-pay-gap
Jayakumar, A. (2015, February 25). What gender wage gap? D.C. is the best city for women in technology. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-business/wp/2015/02/25/what-gender-wage-gap-d-c-is-the-best-city-for-women-in-technology/
legislation.gov.uk. (n.d.). Equal Pay Act 1970. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from legislation.gov.uk: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1970/41
Rampell, C. (2009, January 12). Political Affirmative Action: Quotas for Women. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from The New York Times: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/political-affirmative-action-quotas-for-women/
Restructure! (2010, October 25). I blame the Patriarchy for my technical incompetence. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from Restructure: https://restructure.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/i-blame-the-patriarchy-for-my-technical-incompetence/
Zadrozny, B. (2015, March 12). Women Won’t Have Equal Pay Until 2058. Retrieved June 11, 2015, from The Daily Beast: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/12/women-won-t-have-equal-pay-until-2058.html