Peterson's 12 Rules for Life v2.0-- actual book discussion

[GrandizerII]

Continuing my prior post ...

From his interview with Cathy Newman, Peterson said:

There’s a personality trait known as agreeableness. Agreeable people are compassionate and polite. And agreeable people get paid less than disagreeable people for the same job. Women are more agreeable than men.

Problem is that research shows agreeable women are nevertheless paid less than agreeable men.

From this article:

People who are highly agreeable are often labelled as compassionate, polite and kind, which may seem advantageous to the career success. Women who are highly agreeable, however, received a wage penalty. This was especially prominent for women on high incomes. The impact on men of appearing agreeable was insignificant, giving them a significant wage advantage.

Also, here:

But the researchers also found that women who broke out of traditional gender expectations and acted more dominant and demanding, rather than nice and agreeable, managed to up their salaries. Nice women, on the other hand, got fewer promotions and lower salaries than everybody else.

Emphasis mine.

But that's not all:

But alarmingly, dominant women were still found to earn less than even the most agreeable men who aren't promoted

Further confirmation here:

“Now, the unfairness of it,” Judge continues, “is that when women ask for more, they are more likely to have their motives questioned, which can neutralize some of the advantages. So, I think women must present their requests in a non-threatening, gentle but firm sort of way. In essence, the way women communicate their demands matters more than it does for men.”

Seems clear to me that Peterson is underestimating the role sexism is playing when it comes to the gender pay gap.