One thing we’ve all learnt is that liberals are inconsistent and often contradictory. One area of glaring paradoxical inconsistency is the Marxist-socialist-liberal ideology of new wave feminism and gender struggle. The gender feminists are at odds with the other liberal ideology of gender neutrality and transgenderism.
The contradiction is so great you can be at one end of the spectrum, a “Terf” or “trans-exclusionary radical feminist” and at the other end, a “transfeminist.”
We’re constantly told gender is not important, it’s a societal construct and if you are unfortunate enough to read the Guardian, we’re all in fact non-binary. We’re all fifty shades of beige. Bland, uncompetitive, expressionless, politically correct drones. Our gender plays absolutely no part in who we are or how we behave. If science tells you otherwise it’s either biased research or fake news.
That is, of course, unless you are talking about President Trump. Many on the left still believe the results of the presidential election would have been different if the candidates’ genders were reversed.
The contradictions are further highlighted with the liberal obsession with the gender pay gap, which has been in the headlines again following the resignation of the BBC’s China editor Carrie Gracie. The gender pay gap is said to be circa nine per cent.
Gracie recently resigned her £135k-a-year role to protest the gender pay gap, in which some of her colleagues such as the Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen, earns £150-190k-a-year and this was claimed to be discriminatory. Equal pay for equal work is a matter of law under the Equality Act, but who decides what work is equal?
Bowen has covered numerous war zones, was one of the few reporters inside Syria to cover the civil war and has even been shot in the head in the line of duty. Gracie covered China, a peaceful country with one of the world’s lowest murder rates.
If you earn more, or less than your colleagues, it is not because of gender discrimination, it is because of one or all of the following ten factors:
- Academic and professional qualifications
- Previous experience
- Quality of experience (well-known competitors, transferable relationships/customers)
- Time with the company and average time with previous companies
- Your negotiating ability
- How desperate the company are to fill the vacancy/retain you
- Your boss (your relationship with them and their influence up the chain)
- The number of people that report into you
- Hazardous working conditions (e.g. a reporter in a war zone, working at height).
Your gender is not a determining factor. It doesn’t even come into consideration. If companies could legally pay women significantly less and this was the only variable, they would be terrible business people if they didn’t hire an entire female workforce.
Contrary to what the gender feminists believe, there are clear biological and behavioural differences between men and women which can lead to income disparities. This results in a gender pay gap, but there is no objective evidence of discrimination.
The mere existence of a pay gap is not the reason to justify corrective action. The pay gap could be entirely the result of life choices and individual behaviours. Disparity doesn’t prove bias.
Prof. Jordan B Peterson told Channel Four recently “There’s a personality trait known as agreeableness. Agreeable people are compassionate and polite, and agreeable people get paid less than less-agreeable people for the same job. Women on average are more agreeable than men.
“That’s one component of a multi-varied equation that predicts salary. It accounts for maybe five-per-cent of the variance. You need about another 18 factors, one of which is gender. Prejudice accounts for a much smaller variance in the pay gap than the radical feminists claim.”
The former Google engineer, James Damore, highlighted behavioural differences in more detail in his internal memo entitled ‘Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber’ in which he said “We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism” and that women generally “prefer jobs in social or artistic areas” while “more men may like coding.” He suggests that men prefer the fundamental methodology and repetitiveness of coding, whereas women particularly stand out when it comes to front-end web design and the “user experience” which requires a greater degree of conscientiousness.
Regardless of what the feminist liberals will have you believe, there are behavioural gender differences, yet the book Men Are from Mars and Women Are from Venus would probably be considered hate speech for enforcing dangerous gender stereotypes by today’s standards.
Men are more likely to lie on their CV, with 42 per cent of men admitting to this. Men are more likely to apply for roles where they meet only 60 per cent of the qualifications, whereas women tend to only apply when they are 100 per cent qualified for the role. Men are 22 times more likely to be imprisoned than women and are also 97 per cent more likely to die at work.
Women are 35 per cent more likely than men to go to university, a figure increasing year on year. An impressive 57 per cent of graduates that attain first class honours are women. Women actually earn on average, more than men until they are 35 when the ‘pay gap’ reverses.
Job tenure is a key factor. Prof. Peterson explains: “Many women between the age of 28 and 32 have a career-family crisis they have to deal with. The typical woman has to have her career and family in order, pretty much by the time she’s 35, because otherwise the options start to run out and so that puts a tremendous amount of stress under women, especially at the end of their twenties.”
Many women will seek more flexible hours when they decide to have a family and as a result there are 2.11 million men working part time, compared to 5.85 million women. Women take an average time off of nine to 12 months for maternity leave. This may not seem a long time however this is time off during a peak period in your career. The average age for promotion is in your mid-30s to early 40s and according to Health and Social Care Information Centre, the average age of mothers was 34. This supports the fact highlighted earlier, that women actually earn on average, more than men until they are 35. Unmarried women, who’ve never had a child, actually earn more than men.
Childcare is another factor. With the average cost of a day nursery being £12,000, the rise of ‘stay at home dads’ could also close the gender pay gap. According to Pew research in 2015, 16 per cent of American stay-at-home parents are fathers and a quarter of those stay at home because they cannot find a job. The largest share of stay-at-home fathers is due to illness or disability, whereas 73 per cent of stay-at-home mothers do so, specifically for childcare. Stay at home fathers are twice as likely to lack a high-school diploma.
It’s natural that the higher potential breadwinner returns to work and the impressive university statistics for women, could make this trend increasingly in favour of women.
You cannot solve this disparity with quotas, such as percentage of women in senior roles, or on the boards of FTSE 100 companies. Quotas are reverse discrimination and have no overall effect on wages. They are equality of outcome, rather than equality of opportunity. According to nordicparadox.se “As quotas were introduced in Nordic countries, the management of firms deteriorated. The reason is that less experienced people were put on boards. More importantly, the quotas have not been able to have any broader effect on the gender gap in wages. They have merely benefited a small group of elite women who have been given board positions due to the quotas.”
The gender equality paradox means that increasing positive discrimination and statutory quotas to help women get top jobs has the opposite effect.
There is a gender pay gap. But it is very little to do with victimhood, bias or sexual discrimination. It is far more to do with behavioural differences, biological traits and life choices.
Standing up for those without a voice in Britain
Follow @mattlynchgb on Twitter.