Is the wage gap real?

Not really. If it exists it's only one or two percent.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. The wage gap is as much of an id-pol distraction as the I.Q. gap. You shouldn't be treating entire races or genders as homogeneous units. Those categories are made of individuals, and those individuals can have different levels of muh privilege or oppression. Even if the wage gap was as high as 80%, Hillary Clinton still wouldn't be more oppressed than a homeless white guy. Even if the I.Q. gap was 80 points, a black particle physicist still wouldn't be less intelligent than a white redneck who dropped out of elementary school.

This is why it's best to let the idpol crowd play bourgeois politics with each other, they're only going to co-opt anything of value and should be shouted down when they step outside their neoliberal playpen.

It isn't that simple and surely depends on the area in question.

I can only talk about what I know in my country:
There's no real wage gap if the job + amount of work is the same. There's a wage gap if we compare what kind of jobs women take and which men. There's also a wage gap because men are more likely to work overtime than women.

It gets even a little more difficult if we add in housework/caring for children/etc: after that is counted as working, women and men work approximately the same hours in a week. So in a typical family, the man and the woman might work the same amount, yet the woman has less own money.

So some questions: should we value housework more? Why do women and men pick different kinds of jobs? Why is this job valued higher than that job?

Yes, read a book

Is there a gap between wages and work for everybody who works for a wage of even a salary?

Yes, this is the nature of capitalist exploitation. We want to remove the entire wage system.

Yes, it's real. Women earn more than men.

archive.is/OjEn9
content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html
archive.is/GhVGd
bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37456449/top-modelling-agent-says-male-models-suffer-big-pay-gap-compared-to-women

Your classcuck is showing.

The wage gap is an inherent problem in capitalism itself. Women on average work less hours and take off more time because of children, and as a result are see as less effective wage slaves, and the work they do in the home isn't easily capitalized.

Uphold Marxist-Feminism OP

It's not just women choosing lower paid jobs. Discrimination in choosing who to employ in the first place in good jobs would lead to women on average earning less. ie you can't just say 'there's no wage gap it's all due to women's preferences'. Also I've seen at least one study showing women are more ambitious than men at age 15

No it's not. That is literally the job of feminist humanities professors.

At age fifteen, a man's only ambition is to get his dick wet and impress his friends. That's just puberty.

abolish the wage system you idiots

I would have used "human", but that was a bit too broad. I'm not here to protect the sensitive feelings of American retards.

You can't have a wage gap if you abolish wage labor.

This.
People don't hire men or pay men more than women because they hate women but because under capitalism, men can generate more profit.

It is because women pursue careers that don't pay so well.

Ok.

i'm gonna need sauce on that image

i spent too long thinking of how to word a response like that

i need coffee

Not only that, but female occupations, even though they require more or equal education, generally pay less.

Lots of memes going on in this thread. There are mainly two criticisms feminist leftists use: 1) Discrimination against mothers and 2) That female dominated occupations pay less.

Women choose differently, but the point isn't that they choose less pay, the point is that what they choose pays less

Lazy Town porn parody.

Why are we assuming everyone SHOULD study STEM be a soulless corporate drone and help the capitalist masters at google find new ways to exploit us instead of focusing on family and community? Why is the first option seen as inherently better than the second? The obsession with muh high paying STEM jobs is less feminism and more stealth social engineering. People might be 'included' in the system, but they have absolutely no voice in what's actually being done. What you are doing is socialising people to fit the needs of capital even when it goes against their actual preferences.

Liberal feminism assumes the world is perfect as it is, a smooth functioning economic system,marred only by instances of arbitrary, economically senseless 'discrimination'. I believe the system as a whole is profoundly insane and headed towards total annihilation. Rather than forcing people to adapt to a broken system, we should change the system to serve the people as they are.

It really isn't the job of Marxists to waste time figuring out why people belonging to one completely arbitrary category act a certain way. There are effectively and infinite number of ways to divide people up into arbitrary groups. Are you going to dedicate your life to figuring out the nuances of each of those completely arbitrary groups' decision-making processes?

It would be faster to figure out why individual humans act in certain ways.

...

There is no need for more humans. People should be discouraged from reproducing. Admittedly there are probably better ways to achieve the same effect, such as adding birth control drugs to the water supply.

Education isn't the only factor. The overwhelming majority of unpleasant, dangerous, and anti-social jobs are male-dominated. Oil rig workers aren't paid for their education - they're paid for the horrible conditions they work in. Same for truck drivers, miners, etc.
I'd like to see some studies which actually try to account for all of those factors.

Isn't that about as far away from someone you can get on Earth?

It is IdPol

The main problem is not that there is a pay gap but that feminist liberation highlights the contradictions of Capitalism. This is why Holla Forums says women's suffrage will be the downfall of humanity. They see the nuclear family as a productive engine that creates wage slaves for the market. Giving women equal rights inflates the amount of available workers by nearly 50% which reduces total wages of men by 50%. Where women previously supported the family in unpaid servitude now they can actually earn a living independently and this subverts the hierarchy. The result is more daycares and longer school hours and depressed wages across the spectrum. Feminism under capitalism further enslaves everyone and liberates none.

The only answer.

Half the circumference of the Earth is about 12,400 miles, so no, not if you're going by plane. The diameter is ~7900 miles though, so in straight line distance terms you're right.

And what about the 'wage gap' between workers and capitalists? or between the third world and the first world? Those sort of arguments assume capitalist wage labor is a fair and rational system that just isn't 'correctly' applied due to irrational prejudices. But maybe irrationality is inherent to the system, part of its core nature

ITT: far left people evading issues by shouting "muh revolution"

Of course, there are situations where this radicalism works. But it is lazy and irresponsible to refuse to tackle issues under capitalism. Currently the revolution is really far away, we cannot answer "muh revolution" to every issue. We must work for smaller causes and try to build a way to a bigger revolt. We must criticize capitalism but also work on immediate benefits for oppressed groups. We must join them in their fight for less inequality, so maybe they will join ours.

It lacks solidarity to demand other oppressed groups to just deal with their own problems until we can overthrow capitalism. Why would the women join our cause if we don't give a shit about them until later?

Why is it an issue. Why is "women" a more real category than, say, "people born in June"? Can we fight for equal pay between red-heads and normal people?

Why aren't you fighting for the tangible mistreatment of individuals, of which there are billions of examples, but deem it worthwhile to make sure Hillary Clinton and Theresa May aren't discriminated against?

welcome to leftypol

women in the liberal world aren't oppressed, and they're not specifically or especially exploited over others. we're all victims of the same problem: capitalism. and we'll all benefit equally from its destruction

if you want to help actual oppressed women, go to central africa and try to keep women from being gang raped and getting their breasts hacked off with machetes

Because people perceived as "women" are discriminated against in some areas of life, whereas people perceived as "born in June" aren't. You aren't actually this dumb.

This is not to say that men aren't also discriminated against in some other areas of life, etc, or that something like class muh privilege doesn't negate a lot of bad things that come from being perceived a woman (or black or anything else).

Many feminists dislike people like them. The most well-grounded criticisms of Clinton came from feminists, in my opinion. Most probably don't, sure, as many feminists are bougie af.

liberal feminism claims to stand for all women, but in reality it is a professional class ideology with a very narrow idea of what 'liberation' means, ie. individualistic success within the confines of consumer capitalist society is held to be the epitome of 'empowerment', when in reality it doesn't even make you happy or makes the world a better place.

Can we talk about the very real discrimination suffered by people with certain surnames then?
faculty.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Sweden 2012 AUG.pdf

I'll say it more clearly:
If the category you are fighting for is not defined as being exclusively composed of oppressed individuals, then you're better off fighting for those oppressed individuals.
Women are not an oppressed class as much as you would like them to be.

Well, depends on what exactly we mean by oppression, but if I'm gonna say that the worker with a relatively comfortable life is oppressed, I can say that the woman who has been mistreated based on her perceived gender is, as well. Sexism exists, anyway, and of course it also affects men. And men have some problems that are more common for them, regardless of sexism: I do stand with people who fight against homelessness, etc.

-Rape and other forms of sexual violence are common enough and usually directed at people perceived as women
-They're provably often taken less seriously and so on
-Still big differences in what kinds of work women/men do and how they're rewarded for these different works
Some examples.

Liberal feminism can be bad. They will occasionally stand for good things and then I will stand with them. I will criticize them when they forget class or only stand for muh privileged women.

Not if you include prisoners - one of the most oppressed categories (if we use your stupid definition of an oppressed category).

see
Show me all the underpaid women working life-threatening jobs.

Also, I should point out that the style of discourse of all the supposedly non-liberal feminists here is only furthering my belief that absolutely nothing good can come from feminism.

Nobody is talking about how to solve problems. It's a fucking argument about who is the most oppressed.

The exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner.
oh here we go
no it doesn't. women in the western world are equal under the rule of law, and have the same rights, benefits and muh privileges as men
rape is considered probably the second worst crime a person can commit after child abuse. rape and rapists are despised by society. it's a hot-button issue that receives inordinate attention and activism from every part of civil society. exactly what more do you want done about it? make rape "more illegal"?
lol. get real please
because they're being forbidden from certain lines of work, right? those mean old men just won't let all those eager women become boilermakers! it's like living under the taliban over here

just stop. feminists' "arguments" are pure nonsense and delusion, and they've been refuted over and over again ad nauseum. it's boring and embarrassing

why the fuck are you guys still on about this. the wage gap has been debunked. the wage gap takes into account all employed male and females and that's pretty much it. it does not take into account the decisions women make, for example, women work more part time jobs than men. women prefer to choose low paying career paths, women prefer to spend more time at home at less time working, etc. economists do not take the wage gap seriously.

It's real but its structure and meaning is constantly misrepresented as an election red herring to avoid discussing more important issues.

I don't think most here do either, it's one of those "recurring threads that gets shittier with time".

I don't know about them, I live in a part of the world where prisons are a bit less horrifying. It might be a big issue in the US, for example, out of these well off countries.

Nurses? Patients get violent, though "life-threatening" could be disputed. And this is not a comparison of oil rig workers vs teachers. Solidarity must be universal. Both different groups and different individuals meet different problems in their lives.

Well, the discussion is set up in a way where I need to justify why I consider feminism a decent cause. I'm not saying that women are necessarily much worse off on average than men, even: it is the other people itt doing all the "who is the most oppressed" nonsense. I want to fight against all forms of discrimination and oppression and exploitation.

Wage gap: I don't know, I tried to call it a complicated thing earlier. It doesn't exist in the commonly understood sense, but surely it'd be nice to encourage more diversity in different lines of work.
Sexual violence: education is probably the best way to fight against it. Not as in schools, but talking about it, bringing it up, etc. Also intervening if one sees harassment. Providing help for victims, so on. Having 0 tolerance for harassment.

Your image makes no sense. A feminist who wouldn't encourage more male nurses or more female carpenters, where?

The "problem" is that as a society we value different types of labor differently. Child care and some other vocations traditionally dominated by women pay shit wages because they aren't valued as much.

it makes perfect sense. you say there are "still big differences in what kinds of work women/men do and how they're rewarded for these different works," but the data show that women simply don't want certain jobs, including ones that pay more than the jobs women actually will take. thus refuting your claim

And this is because they're not "productive" even if they're 100% necessary for the society in question to function. Where'd the bourgeoisie get their workforce to exploit if no one raised the kids? The wife who works less hours than the husband is likely to do more housework, which is, again, a necessity.

Big news: internalized sexism. Of course women are sexist as well.

not an argument. your claim stands refuted

I don't really see what you mean. Most people don't want to get rid of capitalism, most workers probably consider the wage system pretty good (as long as they get enough wage). It can be criticized anyway. So, women contribute to sexism, many even enjoy it: it should still be possible to criticize and study it.

and you think sexism is currently lacking study and criticism, hmm?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Males on average really do work more hazardous jobs.

There are a shitload of violent injuries in the healthcare industry. But I guess it is funny…

Sure. Well, your image does not prove it: the workplace deaths could be higher because the most dangerous jobs are male-dominated, the average could still be whatever, but I don't really question your claim.

How hard is it for these "lefties" to understand what universal solidarity means? And to understand that this is not an oppression olympics?

and the most dangerous jobs are male dominated because women clearly aren't interested in dangerous jobs. duh

Tbh I don't think even most men "want" dangerous jobs, but must select them because of body build and the wages. Who the fuck wants to have a 70-90% chance of fucking getting killed on the job? I don't care how manly or macho you are, that shit sucks fam.

When these jobs become safer and/or more automated, what then?

feminists will complain that there aren't enough female robots doing the jobs because of the robopatriarchy