This report states that women got the right to vote in the USA in 1965?!?
I think it was in 1920...

As for the gender pay gap in the United States, I think it can be explained in part by this article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20071116/sc_livescience/womenexpectedtomissmoreworkthanmen

If you're leaving work early (or missing work more often), it's not exactly easy to climb that corporate ladder.

May I say I think there is something really wrong about this report? It places Spain above the UK in gender equality. Now, I've lived in both countries, I am spanish and there is no way in Hell, or Heaven, that Spain is more egalitarian than the UK. NONE.

MaryTracy, if you look at the rest of the report, it's obvious that Spain bumps the UK due to the Political Empowerment rating, which is almost certainly explained by the one-member district system of the UK. The difference in that factor makes up for the UK lead in the areas of economy, education and health.

I'm reading the 173-page report now. I'm starting to notice that the way equality is defined is equality of outcome. There's not much in there that acknowledges (much less measures) choice, i.e. a woman's choice to forgo working in a paid job. I don't know about you all, but from my perspective, work is just that -- work. It is labor. A person who decides not to enter the paid workforce is someone I assume to be exercising their own personal interest. The outcome of that choice is considered valueless by studies like these; I mean, how easy is it to measure the housewife's satisfaction in the life she has chosen? It's not quantifiable by money. Hence, notions of inequality (as embraced by this study) fail to take such subjective measures of value into account.

A mother who loves to nurture her kids, or a wife who enjoys the home life, or simply the single woman who earns a living in her own business -- these are not considered. And yet all three of those types of women have one thing: choice.

Take this into account when you hear the wail of "inequality."

That's because equality of outcome results in equality of choice, John. All other things being equal, as people like saying, the choice of a person to forgo economic position is no problem.
However, all other things are never equal.
I don't think "but women don't want to be financially equal!" is a valid argument against structural disparity. If housework is worth so much to society, then by all means start paying for it, instead of ignoring the fact that disparity of resources = disparity of choice.

AndersH, housework is important. But you're assuming that stay-at-home women are doing all the housework, and you're also assuming that men are not paying for it.

John, the "wail of inequality?" I'd like to remind you that this isn't a MRA site.

If stay at home parenting was really about choice, then we'd see men doing it in much greater numbers. Don't men hate their jobs? Don't fathers love their children? But boys don't see stay at home dads as role models so they don't see that as an option, while girls constantly get the message that they should have kids and stay home so when their worklife gets too stressed guess what they want to do.

I think it's weird when men go on and on about how great being a housewife is so wonderful and nurturing your kids is so great, but talk like they've never considered men doing it. If that's what you think of it, why don't you do it? Or at least want it as an option for your male friends and family? For as hard as people are on a woman who chooses (anything, but back to the topic) to leave work to be "just" be a housewife people are 100 times worse on a man who does the same.

"John, the "wail of inequality?" I'd like to remind you that this isn't a MRA site.

Oh yeah... Whoops... How about "claims of inequality?"

I'm actually reading the report for work because they did some surveys on legislation against violence against women and I'm not a big fan of the way they've measured "equality". They need to grow with the times.

Although, for the 10th time in my life I find myself asking "how quickly can I learn Swedish?"

In response to Marle's comment:

Oh, come on! Get real! Women who stay home do so not just because they love that life, but because they can!

You'll see more stay-at-home dads NOT when men change, but when women change. When women will go to work and provide the economic cocoon within which the stay-at-home partner lives, only then will you see more men staying at home. What did you expect, BOTH partners to stay home? Who's going to pay the bills?

John,

I work a forty hour work-week outside the home and my husband teaches college classes in the evening around my work schedule. This makes him the primary caretaker of our baby and, of the two of us, the partner who is most responsible for the home. I think if you look you'll find that there are more families like us than you would imagine... families in which the money-earning and home-making responsibility has been divided in a manner that is as egalitarian as possible.

Feminism is about ensuring couples the freedom to arrange their lives as they see fit independent of traditional sex roles. If you are concerned about the inequalities of sex roles as they are traditionally constituted I think you would be well served by becoming a feminist. And maybe letting a little of the anger go.

So John, why aren't you arguing that women should have more economic opportunities so you'll have more opportunity to be a stay at home dad if you think it's so awesome?

The amount of single mothers shows that women are more than able to be breadwinners. Almost all women have careers before having kids, just like men, but even when the woman makes similar to what her partner does or even more, 99 times out of 100 they never ever even consider having him be the stay at home parent.

Personally, I think I'd be a terrible stay at home mom. I know next to nothing about babies, I've never changed a diaper, and I think I'd be overwhelmed after about 5 minutes. But, I think it's better for kids to be raised by a parent rather than a day care center (no offense to any parent who's put your kid in a child care center!). I think it would work out really well if my partner was a stay at home dad, but I don't think it'll happen. Men's worth in this society is so tied up to their paychecks that few can deal with giving that up. When men and women are seen as equals and "women's work" is not seen as degrading then men and women will be able to chose careers and/or stay at home parenting freely.

"Economic cocoon" really? Cause I thought earning my own salary rather than being dependent on someone else was an economic cocoon. I might try living with the fear that our money is really "his" money in his mind before imagining the luxury and easefulness of an economic cocoon. Who's outside of reality here?

As for women changing first. Yeah, cause we run things...

I am so glad to hear the examples provided that stay-at-home women are not really stay-at-home women; they work in jobs. That's not exactly a refutation of my statements that women must be willing to be the primary breadwinners before men are willing to stay home. But it's a start. You're living proof of what I wish for the world to be -- for women to get out of the home and into the paid workforce. Let men have the option of staying home for once.

Secondly, I think it's important to acknowledge a reality. Even when men have the option of being the stay-at-home dad or husband, they probably won't choose this because of cultural attitudes against this. I've heard such men derided as wimps, "kept men," pussified, etc. And it's not just a male hangup... Women are just as capable of hurling the insults.

I remember a time when I was the primary care provider. I really bonded with my son, and my then-wife noticed this and started feeling left out. You should have heard the insults to my manhood and masculinity. I hated it. Thankfully, none of my male friends talked to me this way. But it bothered me that a stay-at-home dad had to put up with both the lack of earning power as well as the social stigma.

In my opinion, the greatest contribution of the women's movement was in its ability to bring women back into the workforce. As an MRA, I view this as male liberation. It's tough to be the provider whose job is considered indispensable. And it's probably even tougher when a stay-at-home parent depends solely on that income, that job, and yes, the willingness of the primary breadwinner to remain in that job.

John, feminism opposes the abuse you describe in your post. Join us!

It is disappointing that whenever I see reports like this, the United States is never at the top. Disappointing, but certainly not surprising.

Sgzax wrote:

"John, feminism opposes the abuse you describe in your post. Join us!"

Or, you could join us and become an MRA. :-)

Thanks to certain feminists, in my state of California, domestic violence is specifically defined in the penal code as a crime "against a woman." I'm glad that thoughtful people like yourself recognize abuse when they see it. But abused men just don't get much sympathy. Perhaps it's because abusive men exist.

Nevertheless, I view the female return into the workforce as the ultimate liberator of men. Even domestic violence will lessen, both against men and women. A lot of DV is the result of power imbalances, and economic power imbalances in the home can create feelings of powerlessness and insecurity (both in a victim and in an abuser). Economic empowerment is what allows people to be choosers. Women who exercise their option to stay in the home may sacrifice earning power, but many of them enjoy intendant spending power that comes with that choice. All while the workhorse slaves away in his career or job. When you can work for yourself (and not others), that is liberation.

John, it's interesting how you mix legitimate feminist concerns with the batshit MRA "feminist conspiracy" bullshit. As you may have noticed, we, the feminists, are concerned about the gender gap, and think we should work against it, whether by structural anti-discrimination measures or social stigmatization. I don't think you need to look that deeply to find that a lot of MRAs are ride their hobby-horse of male entitlement and blame feminism for various of society's ills, which, were they really concerned for equality, they wouldn't do.
Of course, since you quite quickly turned to the "women are extorting men!" form of argument, I assume that group includes you.

Batshit feminist conspiracy bullshit? It really is true that California law excludes male victims. Here is a screenshot PDF of the section of the law that I was referring to. It's actually the Health and Safety Code, not the Penal Code as I had mentioned earlier. This means that any men who need help may not receive services as provided by the state. I don't think it was MRAs who enacted this policy.

By the way, when I call for women to get out of the house and start working, that is not a "feminist concern" per se. To me, it's an MRA concern, and we happen to share some common ground with feminists on that one.

There is another movement of men who are not waiting for women to get out of the house and work in paid jobs. It's called the marriage strike, and its spokesmen are known as MGTOW. Men are not getting married because it's expensive during the marriage to work all day to support a materialist mindset amongst your wife and family, and they want to avoid the financial carnage of a divorce. They are exercising their personal best interest in avoiding marriage. That's hardly some MRA conspiracy theory; it's a measurable social trend. Feminists will try to kid themselves into thinking that it's the women rejecting marriage. You just go on telling yourselves that.

Jesus, it's like MRAs live on another planet. The world you have described bears no resemblance to the one I live in. Whatever.

Sgzax wrote:

"Jesus, it's like MRAs live on another planet. The world you have described bears no resemblance to the one I live in. Whatever."

Empathy for the struggles of others is something I wish more people had.

Countdown sequence to ban: initiated.

(glancing at stopwatch)

There is another movement of men who are not waiting for women to get out of the house and work in paid jobs.

BTW, as soon as the marriage strikers open their mouths and explain why they're not marrying, feminists realize that they'd be insufferable to be married to anyways. So, I say thank you to all marriage strikers for taking yourselves out of the running so that women looking for husbands do not have to waste their time with you.

The Woman Never Lies Myth

Empirical evidence does not support the widespread belief that women are extremely unlikely to make false accusations of male sexual misconduct. Rather the research on accusations of rape, sexual harassment, incest, and child sexual abuse indicates that false accusations have become a serious problem.
The motivations involved in making a false report are widely varied and include confusion, outside influence from therapists and others, habitual lying, advantages in custody disputes, financial gain, and the political ideology of radical feminism.

Is the above post even tangentially related to the article cited above? Stop trolling. If you want to yell about your own issues do it on your own damned blog.

John, this thread--hell, this site--isn't a place for you to hijack to push MRA bullshit. Please stop.

Oh man, yeah, women aren't getting married b/c MRA's are on strike. I laughed so hard, I think I pulled a muscle.

MRA's piss and moan that feminists hate men and blame men for everything...except, we don't. We blame the patriarchy and try to dismantle it. MRA's on the other hand, don't try to dismantle the system we live in to make things better. They are actually hateful towards women. They actually blame women for all their problems. It's like, all the nasty things that the MSM and MRA's say about feminists, except that it's true about MRA's. It's amazing. People who want actual equality, work for it. They don't blame other people. They try to change and move the culture. People who want to spit vitriol and keep others down in the mud, they blame women. They try to keep the culture exaclty the same and shut the people who work for equality down. It's disgusting.

"But boys don't see stay at home dads as role models so they don't see that as an option"

Also, even if a boy does have a stay-at-home dad and grows up seeing househusband as an option, he may still not have that option himself when he grows up.

What if he and his spouse don't have enough saved up, inherited, etc. to live on one paycheck instead of two?

What if his fiancée (or possibly fiancé) doesn't want a househusband and threatens divorce if he quits his job?

What if he can't be a househusband because he can't be a husband because he can't get married in the first place (nobody wants to marry him, nobody wants to arrange a marriage for him, etc.)?

You know, like the way not all women have the option of being housewives...

"Almost all women have careers before having kids, just like men"

Given that the original post here has a global topic, I'm reminded of this:

http://www.endfistula.org/family_planning.htm

"In spite of laws against early marriage, 82 million girls in developing countries will be married before they turn 18. About half of all teenage girls will have their first child by the time they turn 18."

How many pregnant teenagers have or had careers by the time they give birth? I bet the answer depends on whether "housewife" is counted as a career.

"When men and women are seen as equals and 'women's work' is not seen as degrading then men and women will be able to chose careers and/or stay at home parenting freely."

Don't forget "and when less-degrading work is not seen as 'white men's work'" in there.

Thank you, Mina, for giving a larger perspective to my points.

Jessica wrote:

"John, this thread--hell, this site--isn't a place for you to hijack to push MRA bullshit. Please stop."

I made my initial comments directly about the subject matter, which was the report on the wage gap. If the rules are that you can't express non-feminist views here, then I understand. But if disagreeing is permitted, then I'll tone down the use of the terms "MRA," "MGTOW," "marriage strike," etc.

I still think it's fair to say that studies like the one highlighted in this posting fail to account for the subjective value of a woman's decision to forgo a paid job. If she gave up a $60,000/year career, for example, then staying at home is worth at least $60,000. But studies like these can never know just what she has given up, or gained as a result. I would like to have a discussion about that.

Jessica wrote:

"John, this thread--hell, this site--isn't a place for you to hijack to push MRA bullshit. Please stop."

I made my initial comments directly about the subject matter, which was the report on the wage gap. If the rules are that you can't express non-feminist views here, then I understand. But if disagreeing is permitted, then I'll tone down the use of the terms "MRA," "MGTOW," "marriage strike," etc.

I still think it's fair to say that studies like the one highlighted in this posting fail to account for the subjective value of a woman's decision to forgo a paid job. If she gave up a $60,000/year career, for example, then staying at home is worth at least $60,000. But studies like these can never know just what she has given up, or gained as a result. I would like to have a discussion about that.

That is a discussion I don't think anyone here has a problem having. The one issue I see, though, is that you still seem to be ignoring the reality that many women don't make the "decision" to stay home. It is foisted upon her in many, many cases, just as you say that the breadwinning role is foisted upon many, many men. Not as a choice. You also keep saying, "get women back into the workplace." Exiting the workplace, if it is a choice, is almost entirely a white uppermiddle class and higher choice. Women of color and lower class women have always been working mothers. If they weren't, their children would starve. And this isn't just single mothers. Most families have to have both parents working to make ends meet. Sometimes if one stays home, it's only b/c childcare is more expensive than that second income.

kissmypineapple wrote:

"The one issue I see, though, is that you still seem to be ignoring the reality that many women don't make the 'decision' to stay home. It is foisted upon her in many, many cases, just as you say that the breadwinning role is foisted upon many, many men. Not as a choice."

The decision to stay home is a decision. How can it not be? Whatever pressures may come to bear leading up to that decision, the more compelling pressure is that of cold economic reality. If the money is just not there, you have to work. If women are not working in paid jobs -- if they are staying home -- it is simply because they can. Having an option at all is a luxury, not an obligation.

What I think you're referring to is that women who stay out of the paid workforce are socially conditioned to stay in the home. After several years go by, whatever academic qualifications or experience they once had start to fade from relevance, and they become trapped. Yes, I get it, and that's a shame. It limits the career prospects of women who become "locked in" to that lifestyle. But it also limits the man who is supporting her, because he can never leave his stable career now... he too is locked in.

Where does this puzzle begin? Early in life, when we're making the choices of what to study, whether to attend (and complete) college, what industry to get into... Sooner or later, we all become locked in. Breaking out of that mold is extremely tough to do, especially when your career choice was to opt out of the paid workforce. It most certainly is opting out. Perhaps too many women have embraced this "home life" because they were pursuing a fantasy, as were their husbands. But you can't get years into the game and then suddenly claim that you were tricked or constrained. We all make choices.

That's why I think the "traditional" arrangement of husband-at-work and wife-at-home is ultimately suffocating. From my perspective, men who embrace (yes, embrace -- another "choosing" word) the provider role are consigning themselves to a life of constrained options.

Looking at the comments, yes some women are forced in to staying at home but many men are also forced in to work to support spouses that don't appreciate the living they provide. Also it really IS a choice in the vast majority of cases. Simple evidence of that can be found in the Census studies.

When a mother has custody, she is likely to have a full time job less than 30% of the time yet when the father has custody he is likely to have a full time job over 80% of the time. So we are left with a few reasons for this;

1) Society discriminates against men so they are not afforded the same help from government programs preventing them from working less.

2) Women make it as a choice in overwhelming percentages.

3) Women are less capable than men and are unable to handle full time work with being a full time parent as well as men.

Now I don't' think it is the last choice so that leaves two others.

So when you look at these studies you have to wonder about the factors. Just like how in the US being raped or molested is no excuse for a male to get out of supporting the child which results would not be looked at in most any study as oppression but if they forced women who became pregnant to have the child it would be. The measurements in these studies tend to have a lot of subjective parts that can change and even reverse the results depending on the items looked at and if there are equal or worse forms of the same treatments against one gender that are not even thought of, much less included.

It's not always a choice to not be a stay at home mom (we're all clear that it isn't always a choice to be a SAHM, right?). Not everyone has the option to go to college and get a wonderful and fulfilling career. Women, on average, make less money than men. Some of that is personal choice, some of that is pressured choice (people, and even career counselors, constantly recommending "pink-collar" work instead of higher-paid careers), and straight-out discrimination. So, a (straight) woman is likely to make less than her male partner. If she makes too little, they might do the math and add up the cost of childcare, the gas she uses commuting to work and childcare, the clothes she buys for work, the higher cost of lunches on the go, etc, and figure out that she may literally not be able to afford to work. This can also happen to men (though not as often, obviously). My friend's dad was a construction worker with a bad back, while her mom is a well-paid scientist. One of their children is special needs and *requires* a stay at home parent. The Dad didn't want to be a stay at home parent, but he really didn't have the option not to.

QED brings up men or boys who father children because of being raped or molested. It has nothing to do with the topic, but I'm going to address it because MRAs get that so wrong. MRAs want the fathers in that situation to have nothing to do with their children, which makes no sense at all. Why should a rapist ever, ever get custody of children, while the victim is the one excommunicated from the child's life? Situations where a child is born who was conceived by rape should be handled the same irregardless of gender. The victim should get full custody (obviously including the unilateral right to place the kid for adoption) and the rapist should only get supervised visitation with the consent of both the child and parent. I think MRAs get this so wrong because they have a disturbing habit of equating not paying child support with abortion, which are so completely different I don't know where to begin.

Marie has some good points but also most women DECIDE to take lower paying careers. Study after study shows they tend to be happier at work as a result while society put a lot of pressure on men to take the stressful higher paying jobs that are also more dangerous. Men have even fewer choices in society on those marks than women. I am a SAHD and even little things like taking my kids to the park get me evil looks by women many times with treatment like I might be a child molester.

Also women have many incentives given to employers to be hired in traditionally male jobs while men are not given any special advantages in female dominated fields like nursing or teaching by comparison. So sometimes it isn't a matter of choice to be a stay at home parent but in the vast majority of cases it is as the statistics for single fathers vs single mothers working full time helps demonstrate.

As to the abortion/rape part, by law men have zero choices on it though they are held responsible no matter what. I would think that in studies where they say women having a lack of access to abortion is considered a for of oppression against them, that the lack of any choices for men would also be a form of oppression against men but I have never seen a study that even looks at that side of the coin. That was my point. These studies can be very weighted based on the items they measure and also the items the don't measure with that as an example.

On a side note, I agree that a rapist should NEVER get custody of a child but I can provide plenty of cases where women who committed rape or molested children not only got custody but also child support from the victim of their crime.