Study finds sexism encourages choice explanations for gender income gap

#1
https://www.psypost.org/2019/02/study-fi...-gap-53149

EXCERPT: New research in Psychology of Women Quarterly suggests that sexism rationalizes gender income inequality by influencing people’s beliefs about the reasons men tend to earn more than women.

[...] In two studies, with 890 participants in total ... People who agreed with statements such as “Women are too easily offended” and “Most women fail to appreciate fully all that men do for them” were more likely to agree with statements such as “Women accept lower earnings for more flexible job,” which in turn predicted their support for statements such as “Differences in income between men and women are often justified.”

[...] Furthermore, conservative participants exposed to sexist statements ... became more likely to view gender income inequality as justified. But the opposite effect was observed for liberal-leaning male participants. [...] “A major caveat is that our experimental findings depended on political ideology, with only conservatives showing predicted effects. Future studies should be careful to disentangle political ideology and sexism, as they are correlated,” [Rachel] Connor said....

MORE: https://www.psypost.org/2019/02/study-fi...-gap-53149
Reply
#2
No, conservatives are just willing to accept the facts that contribute to earning differences, while leftists (they're not liberal) are ideologically driven on the subject. Hence why the former changes when given info and the latter doesn't. And facts cannot be sexist. That assumption betrays the leftist bias of the study.
Reply
#3
These ''findings'' really just seem like obvious conclusions. You mean to tell me that sexist men don't believe that women should be paid equally as men, for doing the same job? lol No way.  Rolleyes
Reply
#4
(Feb 18, 2019 03:18 PM)Leigha Wrote: These ''findings'' really just seem like obvious conclusions. You mean to tell me that sexist men don't believe that women should be paid equally as men, for doing the same job? lol No way.  Rolleyes

There is no apples to apples comparison of jobs here or in the ubiquitous gender pay gap claims. No one is saying women should get paid less for the same work. They are saying that it is not the same job, hours worked, and/or years of experience. When those factors are taken into account, women earn the same or MORE than men.
Reply
#5
(Feb 18, 2019 03:18 PM)Leigha Wrote: These ''findings'' really just seem like obvious conclusions. You mean to tell me that sexist men don't believe that women should be paid equally as men, for doing the same job? lol No way.  Rolleyes

"Duhs" can often arise in connection with what studies of the mundane yield (especially pertaining to people). IOW, that's science -- neutral skepticism about even folk or commonsense conclusions slash beliefs until research lends credence to an _X_ or not. But yet ironically many times allowing a variety of output and proposals from the social sciences (and even biomedical studies) to be popularly and academically treated as substantiated over the years despite no or little replication, flawed judgements about data or statistical errors, conflicting results, etc.

Not to mention the individual worker in the human sciences potentially being contaminated with presuppositions/biases borrowed from cultural environment which could influence systematic inquiry setup and evaluation. (No matter what the romanticized assurances and safeguards proclaimed from an idealized conception of science which significantly exists only on paper.)

For instance: An advocate of classic civil liberties back in the 19th-century, not indebted to the old European class systems, wouldn't allow any proto-"ought" inspirations to be drawn (without mitigation of the data) from research of animal studies and human populations that would either undermine or provide a less desirable alternative to those political prescriptions. Similarly, disciples of contemporary offshoots descended from Hegelian/Marxist schools of thought wouldn't allow (minus palliation) that either for their chosen or conditioned ideological orientations. Or to put another way, such parties of investigators would at the very least hem and haw acrobatically at the end of their published research and press releases about "this should not be taken or construed to mean or allow ___. And furthermore..."

###
Reply
#6
(Feb 18, 2019 04:56 PM)Syne Wrote:
(Feb 18, 2019 03:18 PM)Leigha Wrote: These ''findings'' really just seem like obvious conclusions. You mean to tell me that sexist men don't believe that women should be paid equally as men, for doing the same job? lol No way.  Rolleyes

There is no apples to apples comparison of jobs here or in the ubiquitous gender pay gap claims. No one is saying women should get paid less for the same work. They are saying that it is not the same job, hours worked, and/or years of experience. When those factors are taken into account, women earn the same or MORE than men.
But, aren't they correlating men who are sexists, as believing that women don't deserve equal pay as men? (because of their sexist beliefs) I doubt (most) sexists look that deeply into the ''why's'' of it all.
Reply
#7
(Feb 18, 2019 10:24 PM)Leigha Wrote:
(Feb 18, 2019 04:56 PM)Syne Wrote:
(Feb 18, 2019 03:18 PM)Leigha Wrote: These ''findings'' really just seem like obvious conclusions. You mean to tell me that sexist men don't believe that women should be paid equally as men, for doing the same job? lol No way.  Rolleyes

There is no apples to apples comparison of jobs here or in the ubiquitous gender pay gap claims. No one is saying women should get paid less for the same work. They are saying that it is not the same job, hours worked, and/or years of experience. When those factors are taken into account, women earn the same or MORE than men.
But, aren't they correlating men who are sexists, as believing that women don't deserve equal pay as men? (because of their sexist beliefs) I doubt (most) sexists look that deeply into the ''why's'' of it all.

No, they aren't.

In two studies, with 890 participants in total, the researchers found that sexist beliefs were associated with the acceptance of gender income inequality. This association was mediated by the belief that women’s choices are responsible for the gender pay gap.

People who agreed with statements such as “Women are too easily offended” and “Most women fail to appreciate fully all that men do for them” were more likely to agree with statements such as “Women accept lower earnings for more flexible job,” which in turn predicted their support for statements such as “Differences in income between men and women are often justified.”

“Choice explanations (i.e., inequality is the result of men’s and women’s differing choices) can be used to justify or license sexism,” Connor told PsyPost.
- https://www.psypost.org/2019/02/study-fi...-gap-53149


None of those statements actually say "women don't deserve equal pay as men".

It is an objective fact that "women are too easily offended", as sexual harassment policies that bar racy jokes can attest. Guys don't generally need to worry about what jokes they tell around other guys. And many women do seem to lack appreciation of what men do, like dying on the job and in war in vastly greater numbers...though that one likely does "depended on political ideology", specifically leftists.

"Women accept lower earnings for more flexible job" is precisely the choice difference that make it an apple to oranges comparison. And yes, if you choose to work fewer hours, and thus end up with less experience, the income difference is justified, solely on individual merit, regardless of gender. Works the same for men too. Lazy men earn less that harder working, more dedicated men.

IOW, they didn't show that they even accurately accessed for sexism to begin with. They just presume their bias is correct.
Reply
#8
Those are some broad generalizations, Syne. Your opinion that women are easily offended, doesn't make that an ''objective fact.''

Sexual harassment laws are in place, because employers are liable for what goes on during business hours and it IS a business, not a bar, not a locker room, not a gym, where sexual jokes and comments are par for the course. If you were an employer, you'd want to be protected from men (and women) who can't draw the distinction between what is acceptable at work, and what isn't. That's not being easily offended, I personally don't believe that sexual jokes or any type of sexual conversation, has any place at work. Get to work, then you won't have time to stand around telling jokes that might get you in trouble. Wink
Reply
#9
(Feb 19, 2019 12:06 AM)Leigha Wrote: Those are some broad generalizations, Syne. Your opinion that women are easily offended, doesn't make that an ''objective fact.''

Sexual harassment laws are in place, because employers are liable for what goes on during business hours and it IS a business, not a bar, not a locker room, not a gym, where sexual jokes and comments are par for the course. If you were an employer, you'd want to be protected from men (and women) who can't draw the distinction between what is acceptable at work, and what isn't. That's not being easily offended, I personally don't believe that sexual jokes or any type of sexual conversation, has any place at work. Get to work, then you won't have time to stand around telling jokes that might get you in trouble. Wink

The fact that you draw a line between a job and pretty much anywhere else you interact with people would seem to support my point. Men who work solely with men have zero need to draw any such distinction. Why do you think that is? Hint: It's ain't due to men. Employers only have any liability in the first place because of the offense women take to such things. "What is acceptable" has largely been defined by the sensitivities of women.

And there's a difference between coworker interactions and customer interactions. You might spend eight hours a day with your coworkers and get to know them personally, where it becomes natural to socialize with them as you normally would. But I guess you're a hardass who wouldn't let her employees socialize? Or they have to pretend they're in church 40 hours a week?

Personally, I don't care for lewd jokes or details about sexual exploits, even outside of work. But the difference is that I don't get offended enough to try pushing my preferences on others.

Not "sexual harassment laws" (as you can't be charged for telling a joke...at least in the US), but the extent of company sex harassment policies is only such due to women being easily offended. There is no other objective reason for it to be so. There is no liability unless there has been shown to be one.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  A Five-Year Basic Income Experiment Is Finally Happening in the US C C 1 228 Sep 23, 2017 12:56 AM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)