First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
I am Proud....TO BE A SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR!!!
28218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/18/16

sundin13 wrote:
When the largest and most thorough study looking into hiring practices within STEM (specifically tenure track STEM positions) found that women are preferentially hired 2:1 over men


That study focused on tenured faculty positions at universities in non-math focused fields of STEM. The authors also fully acknowledged they only studied the hiring process itself and that there are plenty of other barriers to women before they reach that point. Their follow up study also demonstrated that the hiring preference only holds when presented with two equally capable candidates with outstanding credentials for a non-math focused STEM faculty position ( No preference was found in math focused STEM fields ). If presented with two high achieving candidates where the male was even slightly more qualified the male would be selected. So the advantage in question is extremely slim.

I would also debate it being the "largest and most thorough study" when it was just a sample selection of American universities and only involved having people review 3 hypothetical job applications.

So while interesting, it is hardly proof that everything is totes fine now on gender equality.



sundin13 wrote:and in many areas across the world, women actually make more than men until their 30s, I'd say that most of the variation comes down to life choices.


The UK, that study was done in the UK. Not "many areas across the world". That study also showed that while women age 22-29 had a slight advantage in annual income, women 21 and under were paid significantly less as well as women 30 and older being paid significantly less. So holding up "Hey its cool cus women make slightly more for 7 years of their lives" as a sign that everything is fine and dandy is disingenuous at best.



sundin13 wrote:
Further, the whole "teachers are underpaid" thing is a myth. They actually get paid pretty darn well, especially when you take into account summer break.


They really don't and I don't follow what you mean with summer break. The annual income of teachers has been quite stagnant for the last decade. You could take practically any other job that has the same level of post secondary training and make more money with less stress. Oh, and female teachers have of course seen their pay lag behind similar professions to a greater degree than male teachers have.

But still, I'm sure everything is fine. -.-
24942 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 3/18/16

sundin13 wrote:Further, the whole "teachers are underpaid" thing is a myth. They actually get paid pretty darn well, especially when you take into account summer break.


Hrm. My standards for an acceptable salary may be much higher than yours. There are a couple people in my family who teach high school math and they are not paid very well at all compared to their previous jobs working for NASA and USAF. And it seems like pretty tough hours to me, plus the hassle of dealing with parents and such. And they want people with a degree in math and a teacher's certificate, so it takes a reasonable amount of effort to qualify for such a low-paying job.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:
No but seriously, why do I feel so ostracized? I've been called a SJW several times.


Heh, so you want social justice for SJWs? Maybe that's why. Too much fighting over dumb stuff. A lot of people want to focus on important issues like why people have to lose most of their money because of medical issues with unknown causes that affect people seemingly at random. Not being white, male, sexually disciplined, or emotionally balanced is far less of a problem than having your immune system accidentally kill important cells.
13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Online
Posted 3/18/16

runec wrote:


sundin13 wrote:
When the largest and most thorough study looking into hiring practices within STEM (specifically tenure track STEM positions) found that women are preferentially hired 2:1 over men


That study focused on tenured faculty positions at universities in non-math focused fields of STEM. The authors also fully acknowledged they only studied the hiring process itself and that there are plenty of other barriers to women before they reach that point. Their follow up study also demonstrated that the hiring preference only holds when presented with two equally capable candidates with outstanding credentials for a non-math focused STEM faculty position ( No preference was found in math focused STEM fields ). If presented with two high achieving candidates where the male was even slightly more qualified the male would be selected. So the advantage in question is extremely slim.

I would also debate it being the "largest and most thorough study" when it was just a sample selection of American universities and only involved having people review 3 hypothetical job applications.

So while interesting, it is hardly proof that everything is totes fine now on gender equality.



sundin13 wrote:and in many areas across the world, women actually make more than men until their 30s, I'd say that most of the variation comes down to life choices.


The UK, that study was done in the UK. Not "many areas across the world". That study also showed that while women age 22-29 had a slight advantage in annual income, women 21 and under were paid significantly less as well as women 30 and older being paid significantly less. So holding up "Hey its cool cus women make slightly more for 7 years of their lives" as a sign that everything is fine and dandy is disingenuous at best.



sundin13 wrote:
Further, the whole "teachers are underpaid" thing is a myth. They actually get paid pretty darn well, especially when you take into account summer break.


They really don't and I don't follow what you mean with summer break. The annual income of teachers has been quite stagnant for the last decade. You could take practically any other job that has the same level of post secondary training and make more money with less stress. Oh, and female teachers have of course seen their pay lag behind similar professions to a greater degree than male teachers have.

But still, I'm sure everything is fine. -.-


a) The point stands. Yes, the study was limited, but if there was actually a significant barrier when it comes to hiring, you would expect to see pretty much any result but that one. As for my "largest and most thorough study" comment, that was a statement in my experience of reading papers about STEM hiring practices. I couldn't find many, but the ones I did find were all much more limited than this study and did less in the way of controls.

b) While there was one study done in UK, there are also studies showing that women tend to earn more in cities across the United States, Sweden and other areas in this age group. As for women earning less through other points of their life, as I said, life choices obviously play a huge role. 30s are when women begin to have kids, and often drop out of the work force for a number of years. This supports my hypothesis.

c) Annual income of teachers is around $55k in the USA which is a pretty hefty amount. Also, when I speak about Summer Break, most teachers in the US at least, do not work year round, so you have to factor in that fact when you look at annual earnings. If you factor that in, annual salary is actual about $75k (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2014/08/07/low-teacher-pay-and-high-teacher-pay-are-both-myths/#51fd80ba3746)...

My overall point is that the differences in pay are explainable by looking at life choices. My post wasn't supposed to be a proof of anything, it was me stating a few facts which imply that discrimination isn't a key factor when it comes to this discrepancy. You highlighted several other factors, but in context, again, life choices explain these discrepancies.
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 3/18/16
From what posts of yours I've seen, I don't think you're an SJW. The thing about SJW's is they are offended by basically everything, and have ridiculous views. An SJW would want us all to live inside a small box with no possessions and no entertainment. Fun is evil! Don't have fun! They're offended by fun!
X5rage 
20162 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / memphis tn
Offline
Posted 3/18/16
whatever makes you happy ,just don't force you veiws on me or others
11768 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / McDonough
Offline
Posted 3/18/16
PV is a SJW? Wai- what? Huh? Where, when? Did I miss something?
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 3/18/16 , edited 3/18/16
No. You're not. Now go to your room and think about what you just said.
5276 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 3/18/16
So you use "SJW" in a purely derogatory manner? Someone who doesn't miss the point doesn't count?
Posted 3/18/16

XxDarkSasuxX wrote:

No. You're not. Now go to your room and think about what you just said.


Are you coming with me?
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 3/18/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


XxDarkSasuxX wrote:

No. You're not. Now go to your room and think about what you just said.


Are you coming with me? :w00t:

But..but I'm not an imouto..
28218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/18/16 , edited 3/18/16

sundin13 wrote:
a) The point stands. Yes, the study was limited, but if there was actually a significant barrier when it comes to hiring, you would expect to see pretty much any result but that one. As for my "largest and most thorough study" comment, that was a statement in my experience of reading papers about STEM hiring practices. I couldn't find many, but the ones I did find were all much more limited than this study and did less in the way of controls.


So you were being disingenuous then by trying to make the study sound more important than it is?



sundin13 wrote:b) While there was one study done in UK, there are also studies showing that women tend to earn more in cities across the United States, Sweden and other areas in this age group. As for women earning less through other points of their life, as I said, life choices obviously play a huge role. 30s are when women begin to have kids, and often drop out of the work force for a number of years. This supports my hypothesis.


The study performed in the US found a similar trend but it only applies to major cities with the following features: A knowledge based economy, a local decline in manufacturing jobs ( traditionally male dominated industries going under ) or an increasing minority population. In cities without these trends, there was no such advantage and outside of major cities, there is no such advantage. In major cities that rely primarily on male dominated industries ( which includes the tech industry ), the trend goes the other way and woman make less across the board.

So no, it does not support your hypothesis as there are clearly more factors going on here than "life choices". The UK study also cited less opportunities for career advancement as one of the problems. Additionally, the US is one of only two countries in the world that hold the shameful distinction of not having any kind of paid maternity leave. So even your "life choices" argument is actually being aggravated in the US by poor social support programs.




sundin13 wrote:c) Annual income of teachers is around $55k in the USA which is a pretty hefty amount. Also, when I speak about Summer Break, most teachers in the US at least, do not work year round, so you have to factor in that fact when you look at annual earnings. If you factor that in, annual salary is actual about $75k (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2014/08/07/low-teacher-pay-and-high-teacher-pay-are-both-myths/#51fd80ba3746)...


One dude from Forbes interpreting a data set does not a study make. The statistics he's using from the Bureau of Labour Statistics are based on employer surveys. These surveys estimate based on scheduled hours ( which for BLS they simply estimate as the in class school year ), not full hours worked outside of class hours. This results in teachers appearing quite well paid under this methodology. It also results in other oddities like saying your HR manager making more than a nuclear engineer.



sundin13 wroteMy overall point is that the differences in pay are explainable by looking at life choices. My post wasn't supposed to be a proof of anything, it was me stating a few facts which imply that discrimination isn't a key factor when it comes to this discrepancy. You highlighted several other factors, but in context, again, life choices explain these discrepancies.


It is a factor. Many studies have already been done while controlled for "life choices" ( and seriously, stop saying that, as depending on the country there may not be that much choice involved ) and other suggested explanations. A gap still remains after being controlled for these factors. Yes, the 76 cents to the dollar thing is widely debunked ( as its drawn purely from raw data ) but when controls are applied an unexplained gap still remains.

There are also any number of studies done that demonstrate discriminatory hiring practices. A man with children for example is still more likely to be hired over a woman with children. Despite both having made the same "life choices".
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 3/18/16


It's always you PV isn't it?
69881 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Oklahoma
Offline
Posted 3/18/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

SJW is an ad hominen--it's thrown at individuals when people aren't smart enough to make a proper argument of their own.



False - it's an insult. It's only an ad hominem when used to conclude someone is wrong.

You can say "you're shitty SJW, you're wrong because point X, Y, and Z" and not have committed a fallacy.

If you say "pfft, you're a SJW, what do you know?" as an argument then it's ad hominem.

I use SJW and support my arguments.
5974 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Terra Australis (...
Offline
Posted 3/19/16
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Why do we talk about Political topics here?

It is fucking mind smashing...

Okay, maybe the reason I wish not to talk about Political topics is because I don't wish to have arguments.

Is that so wrong?

Probably.

Posted 3/19/16

CreatorTheta wrote:

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Why do we talk about Political topics here?

It is fucking mind smashing...

Okay, maybe the reason I wish not to talk about Political topics is because I don't wish to have arguments.

Is that so wrong?

Probably.



Go away. No likes you.


SJW smash!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.