She was asked about her personal experience.

(January 19, 2016 at 7:18 pm)Heat Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 5:05 pm)Beccs Wrote: Many women are paid less for the same job and the same hours.  Don't bullshit me.

Personally, yes I DO know women in that EXACT circumstance.

I myself spoke that this is not the case?  BULLSHIT.

I said it was not the case for ME!

Is that hard to understand?

I, as a professional working woman, am NOT representative of working women as a whole.

Back up these statements with evidence instead of trying to pass off strong worded subjective personal experience based claims as objective ones(being that women earn lower wages for the same work).  You say you aren't representative of the majority, yet claim many women are paid less for the same hours as if it is representative of the entire populous. 

You did this to me earlier as well where you respond by saying "No don't bullshit me, I'm right aren't I." thinking it's somehow disproven the content of what you're replying to, when in actuality is simply giving unbacked confirmation bias to the people reading it.

As Losty said, I was asked for personal experiences.

Since I'm arguing to counter claims made by others, I'd like to see them back up their claims that there's no pay inequality with demonstrable evidence.

(January 19, 2016 at 7:53 pm)Beccs Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 7:18 pm)Heat Wrote: Back up these statements with evidence instead of trying to pass off strong worded subjective personal experience based claims as objective ones(being that women earn lower wages for the same work).  You say you aren't representative of the majority, yet claim many women are paid less for the same hours as if it is representative of the entire populous. 

You did this to me earlier as well where you respond by saying "No don't bullshit me, I'm right aren't I." thinking it's somehow disproven the content of what you're replying to, when in actuality is simply giving unbacked confirmation bias to the people reading it.

As Losty said, I was asked for personal experiences.

Since I'm arguing to counter claims made by others, I'd like to see them back up their claims that there's no pay inequality with demonstrable evidence.

Default position is that there is no pay gap,  it's the same as demanding demonstrable evidence that there is no God.

(January 19, 2016 at 7:56 pm)Heat Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 7:53 pm)Beccs Wrote: As Losty said, I was asked for personal experiences.

Since I'm arguing to counter claims made by others, I'd like to see them back up their claims that there's no pay inequality with demonstrable evidence.

Default position is that there is no pay gap,  it's the same as demanding demonstrable evidence that there is no God.

Seriously?



That's a HELL of a stretch in comparisons.

(January 19, 2016 at 7:58 pm)Beccs Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 7:56 pm)Heat Wrote: Default position is that there is no pay gap,  it's the same as demanding demonstrable evidence that there is no God.

Seriously?



That's a HELL of a stretch in comparisons.

Was simply using an example you would relate to for discussion purposes, yes, it is a bit of a stretch, but it's not incorrect.

There's still no reason to assume there is a gender pay gap, unless it's been proven. It's not up to me, or him, to prove there isn't one. However, if I, or him were to initiate the discussion with "There is no gender pay gap" it then becomes a positive claim, and is up to whomever is making it, to prove so.

This is not the case though, when I responded to you claiming there is a gender pay gap, and you responded back telling others to "Prove there isn't one".

(January 19, 2016 at 7:56 pm)Heat Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 7:53 pm)Beccs Wrote: As Losty said, I was asked for personal experiences.

Since I'm arguing to counter claims made by others, I'd like to see them back up their claims that there's no pay inequality with demonstrable evidence.

Default position is that there is no pay gap,  it's the same as demanding demonstrable evidence that there is no God.

Irrational posted a good recent article on the pay gap on pg. 63 of this thread.

(January 19, 2016 at 9:09 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 7:56 pm)Heat Wrote: Default position is that there is no pay gap,  it's the same as demanding demonstrable evidence that there is no God.

Irrational posted a good recent article on the pay gap on pg. 63 of this thread.

Okay and? One article doesn't magically change the rules of an argument. Also, I never stated there was no gender pay gap, I simply said based on the rules of an argument we are to assume there isn't one by default, because we have no reason to believe there is a gender pay gap in either direction(men, women), until proven so.

I will however, check the article out.

I think that what Pink said is important though. And that's that men tend to take different jobs than women, so it's hard to judge. Also I agree with her and highly doubt there is any instances where someone is directly getting paid less for the same exact job and hours based on gender, I mean that simply seems fallacious, it would be illegal surely, yet feminists act like it is common practice and accepted in society. No one would accept this. If this existed it would be very easy for women to take their pay check, then take their male co workers pay check, hold them up in comparison and point out the obvious differences and inequalities within them. I will look where the evidence points, obviously, nothing i'm saying is definite, however I think if you use some logic, it's not hard to see there may be some skewing of the statistics.

If we take what's been claimed many times as exactly what is true word for word, there would be numerous instances of women comparing their check to their co workers. Is it possible that they are comparing the same work from different states and it appears higher for men because of tax difference(because they are skewing the stat. and not showing men's as after tax and womens as before)? Is it possible that the stats are not exactly what they say and they are comparing people in the same line of work, from different positions? These are all questions I would raise out of logical reasoning, however again, I am not stating these as facts, and will look at the actual information and the validity of it to decide for myself.

(January 19, 2016 at 9:23 pm)Heat Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 9:09 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: Irrational posted a good recent article on the pay gap on pg. 63 of this thread.

Okay and? One article doesn't magically change the rules of an argument. Also, I never stated there was no gender pay gap, I simply said based on the rules of an argument we are to assume there isn't one by default, because we have no reason to believe there is a gender pay gap in either direction(men, women), until proven so.

I will however, check the article out.

I think that what Pink said is important though. And that's that men tend to take different jobs than women, so it's hard to judge. Also I agree with her and highly doubt there is any instances where someone is directly getting paid less for the same exact job and hours based on gender, I mean that simply seems fallacious, it would be illegal surely, yet feminists act like it is common practice and accepted in society. No one would accept this. If this existed it would be very easy for women to take their pay check, then take their male co workers pay check, hold them up in comparison and point out the obvious differences and inequalities within them. I will look where the evidence points, obviously, nothing i'm saying is definite, however I think if you use some logic, it's not hard to see there may be some skewing of the statistics.

If we take what's been claimed many times as exactly what is true word for word, there would be numerous instances of women comparing their check to their co workers. Is it possible that they are comparing the same work from different states and it appears higher for men because of tax difference(because they are skewing the stat. and not showing men's as after tax and womens as before)? Is it possible that the stats are not exactly what they say and they are comparing people in the same line of work, from different positions? These are all questions I would raise out of logical reasoning, however again, I am not stating these as facts, and will look at the actual information and the validity of it to decide for myself.

If you trust the stats, then that article addresses everything else you've stated here.

(January 19, 2016 at 9:50 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(January 19, 2016 at 9:23 pm)Heat Wrote: Okay and? One article doesn't magically change the rules of an argument. Also, I never stated there was no gender pay gap, I simply said based on the rules of an argument we are to assume there isn't one by default, because we have no reason to believe there is a gender pay gap in either direction(men, women), until proven so.

I will however, check the article out.

I think that what Pink said is important though. And that's that men tend to take different jobs than women, so it's hard to judge. Also I agree with her and highly doubt there is any instances where someone is directly getting paid less for the same exact job and hours based on gender, I mean that simply seems fallacious, it would be illegal surely, yet feminists act like it is common practice and accepted in society. No one would accept this. If this existed it would be very easy for women to take their pay check, then take their male co workers pay check, hold them up in comparison and point out the obvious differences and inequalities within them. I will look where the evidence points, obviously, nothing i'm saying is definite, however I think if you use some logic, it's not hard to see there may be some skewing of the statistics.

If we take what's been claimed many times as exactly what is true word for word, there would be numerous instances of women comparing their check to their co workers. Is it possible that they are comparing the same work from different states and it appears higher for men because of tax difference(because they are skewing the stat. and not showing men's as after tax and womens as before)? Is it possible that the stats are not exactly what they say and they are comparing people in the same line of work, from different positions? These are all questions I would raise out of logical reasoning, however again, I am not stating these as facts, and will look at the actual information and the validity of it to decide for myself.

If you trust the stats, then that article addresses everything else you've stated here.

To make another religious comparison: It's like showing a creationist evidence for evolution...