Australian café charges men 'gender tax'

[RAMROD 116,995]

This is what SJWs and PC society contributes to modern life. They can choke tbh!

 

[dannydevito 10,658]

4 minutes ago, QueenGaga said:

@lanalolita excuse me no 

planting excuse me nos like gaga planting seeds in ha farm

*gets excuse me no'd*

[Buddy 5,686]

15 minutes ago, Bebe said:

Firstly, the Forbes article, regardless of it's faults is not talking about Australia... This is an Australian café so even if the article is true - you would have to prove that what's true in the U.S is true for Australia...

The second article you provide uses quotes from a conservative think tank... Popular members include Rupert Murdoch, Tony Abbott and Gina Rinehart and is an important fund raising body for the Liberal Party (the conservative party in Australia). The purpose of the institute is to argue for free-market and libertarian values. They are climate skeptics, they want to eliminate welfare for Indigenous Australians, they want to abolish minimum wage. All in all, they are not a very scientific or reliable source at all. Furthermore, the article I linked actually provides data and statistics and refutes the very argument made in that article.

As for your third link... Quora.com?? I mean... Anyway... The specific claims in that answer such as

"as you drill down into the data looking at particular segments of the workforce, one is increasingly likely to find that the wage gap favours women – not men"

Are not only demonstrably false (http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/gender-pay-gap-93000-in-top-management-positions-report-finds/news-story/7ef27544fff30c36b05d0f1e602be6c7), but ignore important discussion surrounding the wage gap such as the fact that women are kept from entering senior levels.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-08/workforce-women-day-gender-equality/8331128
http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/careers/the-same-resume-with-different-names-nets-different-results/news-story/a2a182fb4570e948c27ce63139ee66b1
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/20/assertive-female-negotiate-job-offer-nazareth-college
http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-the-dangers-for-women-who-negotiate
https://ctliveris.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/gender-equality-at-work-2017.pdf
http://cew.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/FINAL_Advancing-Women-in-Australia_ALL-PAGES-002.pdf

One of the major problems, when it comes to the wage gap, is that women are routinely pushed out of managerial and senior positions. 

As the original article I liked mentions:

"Women have a harder time getting job interviews, then when they do get hired they’re penalised for negotiating. They’re promoted less frequently, especially if they have a child who might one day get sick (even though good parenting has exponential benefits to society). They come home and do the lion’s share of housework and child-rearing, then at the end of the day they pay more for a haircut, and retire in poverty."

I could go line by line, but again the Quora link actually acknowledges the wage gap is real in it's very first sentence. It's also quite U.S centric and, once again, this is a story about an Australian café and Australian wages.

Just watch this

 

[Bebe 17,289]

1 hour ago, Buddy said:

Just watch this

 

I've already watched this and it doesn't address any of the things that have been pointed out to you...
The video states the problem with how the wage gap is calculated (again though, this is U.S centric) is that it doesn't take into account:

#1 Occupation
#2 Position
#3 Education
#4 Hours worked per week.

But the study wouldn't have aimed to do any of these things and couldn't possibly do all these things... The study's purpose was to discover if there there was a difference in how much men and women are paid by comparing the median wages of all women working full time with the median wages of all men working full time.

The video tries to position this as a fault, but studies like this should have a limited scope, they are not designed to find out everything. The research indicates there is a gap in the wages, the question is why?

Is it to do with occupation? Sure that's part of it, something my original article again pointed out...  A huge contributor to the pay gap is the fact that we put a lesser dollar value on professions seen as “women’s work” (eg childcare and social work) compared to male-dominated industries. This isn't just because women enter professions that society values less (i'm not just talking monetarily here, obviously). In terms of what professions actually contribute most to a healthy society, and also economically in terms of flow-on benefits, “childcare” came out number one.

Has it got to do with position? Absolutely, once again it's something I've already pointed out... It's also got nothing to do with women not wanting to take on managerial or senior positions... As the multiple studies, that I have already linked you, show women are often kept from entering senior levels. Companies frequently screen out women “of child-bearing age”, when employers are given identical resumes (except some have a female name, some don’t) the “male” candidates were scrutinised less closely, during salary negotiations women are routinely offered a lower base rate salary than men, and then penalised when they try to negotiate — so their male counterparts end up getting more. Right now, there are also more men named John, Peter or David running ASX 200 companies than the total number of women. And at that chief executive level those women are earning almost $1 million less on average.

Has it got to do with education? No. As already pointed out, once again, while Australian women's educational attainment has steadily increased over the past two decades, the gender pay gap hasn't budged. Women are getting more educated, but the wage cap hasn't closed to reflect that.

Has it got to do with hours worked per week? No. The World Economic Forum estimates that women do on average three hours and 17 minutes more unpaid work each day than men. So while you’re slogging away after five, so are the women who had to ‘clock off’. This no doubt has to do with gender roles and gender expectations - As the Australian census recently showed 1/4 Australian adult men don't do housework. While women are entering the paid workforce in higher numbers than ever before, this has not been matched by a similar boost in men participating in unpaid work at home. This means the majority of domestic, unpaid work has been put on the shoulders of women.. 

The question "Why don't businesses hire only women if they are so cheap?" is also nonsensical and misses the point completely. As pointed out in both original articles I linked, the gender pay gap is not the same as unequal pay. To try and frame it as the same at the beginning of the video is just misleading and intellectually dishonest.

Australia's Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) generally measures it as the difference between women's and men's average weekly full-time equivalent earnings, expressed as a percentage of men's earnings. Unequal pay is different: it is when men and women doing the same work are paid different amounts on the basis of their gender – and that's illegal. So, for example, if there are more men at the top of an organisation, while women are concentrated in its lower ranks, a gender pay gap will exist, but this disparity does not necessarily indicate unequal pay.

This is, as we can see, the case  More men rise to the top of organisations, women are pushed out of these high ranking positions. That's the biggest contributor to the wage gap - something that has been shown in study after study...


I'd also point out that you seem to be fond of getting your information on this issue from conservative think tanks that are consistently unscientific, bigoted and corporatist. PragerU is a non-profit conservative digital media organization, it has links with the AEI (a conservative think tank) that is infamous for being climate skeptics, defending big tobacco, being pro-iraq, anti-gay marriage and for sponsoring figures such as Charles Murray who argues that blacks and Latinos have lower IQs than whites and that most social welfare and affirmative action programs are doomed to failure as a result. It's a conservative propaganda outfit. 

It's worth checking out where you are getting your information. 

[Oriane 22,733]

9 hours ago, JustaMonster said:

WHAT IS THIS

IT'S HORRIBLE

[Economy 52,837]

Sooooo.... what if i was a man that makes below the female average and i still have to pay that?

 

Thats stupid... this is why i hate extreme feminists or Social Justice Warriors... 

 

They take social problems and create the opposide end extreme