(December 30, 2017 at 9:29 pm)SaStrike Wrote: lol stop. i already tried to explain why it isnt the actual numbers. just 1 subset meeting a specific condition. as in a portion of the actual total number. a portion that is actually supposed to be skewed towards men but is 50-50. i have no doubt that if we were to take the portion that looks at "men working more hours than women" it will be far from 50-50. i predict 80-20 favouring women.
Quote:Thena wrote
I made it clear that the Times piece was written in 2009's recession/recovery era, when more women had taken to working longer/full-time hours in light of their spouses' layoffs.
Found the article the Times piece was referencing, if you're interested:
https://www.workingmother.com/special-re...ost#page-3