The workforce is equalizing!

[Magna]

The workforce is definitely equalizing as far more women are working full time jobs of all different types than even ten years ago. My understanding is that there are also more women in college now than men. More women coming out of college with degrees than men. That most definitely means the trend toward workplace equalization will only continue.

There are more female CEOs of companies, more females who hold high level government and military positions. In the company that I work for, from HR on up to CEO level management makeup is around 70% women.

Real life examples that I've also observed recently:

The Dermatology clinic that I go to is literally 100% female staffed and owned, from the physicians, physician's assistants and nurse practitioners all the way down to the front desk staff; not a single man. So many places I go to buy things are staffed primarily with women now than men. Even at the home improvement store I went to this morning. I saw more women than men working and I had to go through the entire store to get the things that I needed.

Personally, I think it's great and I hope it continues. I also wouldn't have an issue personally if the labor force swings to having even more women working than men in all types of industry, etc.

Lifelong full time hard work is an experience that I'm glad is becoming more egalitarian. The more people that have shared experiences as such, the more we're all likely to be able to empathize with each other and strengthen our bonds as a society.

 

[Rodafina]

It will be "equalized" when there is no pay gap.

The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap

 

[Hypnalis]

In the US, it's down to 2% or so.

That "82%" number is highly misleading. The difference isn't a failure of "equal pay for equal work".

The biggest uncorrected factor is usually hours worked - because when you dig down into those figures it always turns out they don't even correct for that.

ETA: The site is genuine, and the guy seems to be as well. This will be interesting.

 

[Rodafina]

In the US, it's down to 2% or so.

That "82%" number is highly misleading. The difference isn't a failure of "equal pay for equal work".

The biggest uncorrected factor is usually hours worked - because when you dig down into those figures it always turns out they don't even correct for that.

It is nowhere near 2% for women of color in the US.

Top Gender Pay Gap Statistics

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/women-of-color-and-the-wage-gap/

https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/wb/wb20240312

 

[Judge]

To me the most defining proof of equal pay among genders depends solely on one thing other than through alleged statistics:

For all 50 state legislatures to amend it into a constitutional amendment. And if even one state legislature is unwilling to abide by the very concept, it still allows for society to keep a gap in wages that shouldn't fundamentally exist.

For society to truly claim that there is no wage gap, it must be formally recognized as a constitutional amendment, passed by all 50 state legislatures and signed into the law by a president. Effectively criminalizing any wage gaps with any and every employer. Which has not happened so far.

Make it the law, instead of decades of bickering over bogus statistics and anecdotal evidence.

 

[Hypnalis]

In most (probably all) of the "Western World", it's literally illegal to pay women less than men all other things being equal.

So while there are sure to be complications down in the details, any claim that doesn't explain what was corrected for, and why, has to be treated skeptically.

I took a quick look, and the corrected number is given as 99% (which makes sense in 2025), but even those sources don't explain what was corrected for, and how they did it. Both are important. 'Multivariate analysis" is a standard technique, but it's possible to get it wrong, and it's easy to manipulate the results.

Conspiracy or stupidity? The proverb says prefer stupidity, but in this case I'm not so sure.

BTW: The "maternity experience gap", and the resulting effect on lifetime earnings is real, and IMO it's a significant problem that should be addressed.

But important things like that will never be addressed while we're chasing a synthetic problem.

 

[Rodafina]

In most (probably all) of the "Western World", it's literally illegal to pay women less than men all other things being equal.

So while there are sure to be complications down in the details, any claim that doesn't explain what was corrected for, and why, has to be treated skeptically.

I took a quick look, and the corrected number is given as 99% (which makes sense in 2025), but even those sources don't explain what was corrected for, and how they did it. Both are important. 'Multivariate analysis" is a standard technique, but it's possible to get it wrong, and it's easy to manipulate the results.

Conspiracy or stupidity? The proverb says prefer stupidity, but in this case I'm not so sure.

BTW: The "maternity experience gap", and the resulting effect on lifetime earnings is real, and IMO it's a significant problem that should be addressed.

But important things like that will never be addressed while we're chasing a synthetic problem.

I’ll reiterate that it sounds like what you are referring to does not take into account the experiences of women of color in the US. Providing some sources from which you form your opinions on issues like this would be helpful.

 

[Hypnalis]

The intro to the Wikipedia article seems to be ok:

Gender pay gap - Wikipedia

BTW this is not the place to start introducing micro-subsets into the discussion. It's hard enough to get people to engage with the real world of incomes in the population as a whole, without folding in the "Apex Fallacy" as well.

FWIW, I would expect "WOCs" to earn less than some other nominally similar groups, but I'd be astonished to learn this violates US law.

But if we looked at say WOC lawyers in NYC vs other XX lawyers in NYC, and corrected for income-relevant differences (such as education and experience), I'd expect those groups to have approximately the same incomes.

 

[Rodafina]

The intro to the Wikipedia article seems to be ok:

Gender pay gap - Wikipedia

BTW this is not the place to start introducing micro-subsets into the discussion. It's hard enough to get people to engage with the real world of incomes in the population as a whole, without folding in the "Apex Fallacy" as well.

FWIW, I would expect "WOCs" to earn less than some other nominally similar groups, but I'd be astonished to learn this violates US law.

Thank you for providing your source.