Obama Endorses Feminist Folly

Posted on | January 29, 2014 | 45 Comments

The myth that women are systematically underpaid — that they’re paid a fraction of what men are paid for the same work — is a basic apples-and-orange error based on comparing the wages of men (on average) with the wages of women (on average) without regard to their occupations, educational levels or years of workplace experience. But the “wage gap” myth is so deeply entrenched in feminist dogma that Democrats insist legislation is needed to correct it, as Obama proposed Tuesday in his State of the Union address:

You know, today, women make up about half our workforce, but they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.
Women deserve equal pay for equal work.
You know, she deserves to have a baby without sacrificing her job. A mother deserves a day off to care for a sick child or sick parent without running into hardship. And you know what, a father does too. It is time to do away with workplace policies that belong in a “Mad Men” episode. This year let’s all come together, Congress, the White House, businesses from Wall Street to Main Street, to give every woman the opportunity she deserves, because I believe when women succeed, America succeeds.

So here we have a myth (women “still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns”), a slogan (“equal pay for equal work”), and a number of vague rhetorical gestures toward policy to overcome a mythical disparity in accordance with an egalitarian slogan. As a demagogic bonus, Obama then implies that his political opponents — those who refuse his invitation to “let’s all come together” in support of his policy proposals — are enemies of women’s success.

Question: If this was such an urgent policy priority for Obama and Democrats, why didn’t they solve this problem in 2009-2010, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress?

Category: Feminism

Comments

45 Responses to “Obama Endorses Feminist Folly”

Bridget
January 29th, 2014 @ 1:40 am

Obama does not understand or acknowledge that many people are paid to be reliable (more reliable than they would if their kid is frequently sick), for a willingness to work longer hours (yes, picking your kid up from daycare is more important than the project that is due, but that does not get the project done), and to do jobs that other people do not want to do.

In other words, you’re free to find a fulfilling job that has you out the door at 5 pm and lets you take plenty of time off for sick leave, but you’re going to pay for it. Rather, you are not going to be paid as well for it.

If you really want women to earn more money, you would start by informing them of this reality when they are choosing college majors.
robertstacymccain
January 29th, 2014 @ 8:31 am

Excellent points. If everybody really tried to maximize their lifetime earnings, we would all study finance and work on Wall Street. The fact that women choose career paths that are different from men is neither good nor bad, and the fact that some people (male, female, black, white, whatever) earn more than other people is not “social injustice” or discrimination.
richard mcenroe
January 29th, 2014 @ 9:19 am

Don’t the WH and DNC underpay THEIR female employees?
RS
January 29th, 2014 @ 9:19 am

Having owned a business with male and female employees, I hear these “facts” about pay disparity and wonder, “where?” I employed people for position X. Position X paid $Y. All I cared about was getting the job done. There are plenty of laws on the books about sexual discrimination in employment, already, which laws do a nice job of preventing discrimination in the workplace. What the One really desires is what Progressives always want: The ability to make personal decisions, i.e. taking time off to rear children or whatever, without bearing any personal consequences for those decisions.
RS
January 29th, 2014 @ 9:19 am

Yep.
JeffWeimer
January 29th, 2014 @ 9:51 am

“Question: If this was such an urgent policy priority for Obama and Democrats, why didn’t they solve this problem in 2009-2010, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress?”

He’d rather have the problem than the solution? If the Lilly Ledbetter Act didn’t work, then he’s not really interested except as a talking point.
Socialism: Organized Evil
January 29th, 2014 @ 9:58 am

The ideology of today’s liberalism isn’t that much more than an ever-shifting mirage of illusions conjured up to fool the gullible and the ignorant.

Great work – keep exposing it.
postaldog
January 29th, 2014 @ 10:31 am

Every time I hear this argument, I keep waiting to hear them cite the job where a man and a woman hired for the same job at the same time aren’t making the same money.
Still waiting . . .
M. Thompson
January 29th, 2014 @ 10:57 am

Feminism means you can lie with statistics and when you’re called out on it, “SEXIST!” shuts them down.
Dana
January 29th, 2014 @ 10:58 am

Do you know how I got ahead in this world. how I kept my job during times when some of my co-workers — some of whom were senior to me — lost theirs? It’s simple: because I was on time, every day. There was never any question of whether I would make it in to work, never any doubt that I would be where I was supposed to be and do the job I was hired to do.
M. Thompson
January 29th, 2014 @ 10:59 am

Like Lou Gerhig! Dependability and quality mean success.
CrustyB
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:20 am

Liberals are all passion, no brains. This is why Obama continues to be the biggest demagogue in US presidential history and why the left has never been more pugnacious. Baffle ’em with bullshit.

Here’s an excellent article explaining the myth of underpaid women being an “injustice.”

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/john-perazzo/obama-revives-an-old-feminist-myth/
Animal
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:20 am

My standard advice to young people hoping to get ahead in the world consists of three points:

1) Show up a little earlier than the other guys.
2) Work a little harder than the other guys.
3) Never pass up a chance to learn something new.

It’s really not that complicated.
jdp
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:21 am

If this were true, why aren’t evil, profiteering capitalists hiring nothing but women? Are they turning down an automatic 23% savings on labor because their sexism is stronger than their profit motive? Something smells fishy with these stats.
Animal
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:21 am

Yeah, don’t hold your breath.
Quartermaster
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:24 am

That’s because it is fishy. In Engineering, for example, a woman is quite often paid more for the same work simply because she is a woman. Gotta have those diversity hires yanno.
postaldog
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:35 am

Heard that.
And isn’t this coming from the same President who pays his female staffers less than male staffers? And whose workplace atmosphere was characterized as one that would qualify as a “hostile work environment” because of the way female staffers were treated?
Hypocrite much?
Art Deco
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:36 am

Again, what Joseph Stiglitz said: the polarity in policy debates is commonly that between economists and lawyers. Obama is a lawyer. He doesn’t get it.
jdp
January 29th, 2014 @ 11:44 am

There’s also some variation of the Peter Principle and the Dunning-Krueger Effect going on as well.
MNHawk
January 29th, 2014 @ 12:00 pm

So what did the stuttering fail actually PROPOSE? It’s easy enough to pose for the stupid, but as far as I can see, any “solutions” basically void a standard part of government union contracts, pay for seniority.
bridget
January 29th, 2014 @ 12:02 pm

I would posit that it’s socially unjust to pay people who work long, hard hours, doing skilled work or gross work, the same as people with cushy office jobs. (I say this as a holder of a safe office job.)

Why should the file clerk earn the same amount as some guy up on the North Slope?
Dana
January 29th, 2014 @ 12:17 pm

And the corollary: the four words you should never, ever say, “That’s not my job.”
Animal
January 29th, 2014 @ 12:27 pm

Excellent point.
Quartermaster
January 29th, 2014 @ 12:39 pm

The loony left is utterly taken with talking points. It’s about all they can handle anymore.
AMartel
January 29th, 2014 @ 1:09 pm

Question: If this was such an urgent policy priority for Obama and Democrats, why do they “underpay” women on their own staffs?
AMartel
January 29th, 2014 @ 1:12 pm

Perhaps because the priority for Obama and Democrats is to keep people at each others’ throats, resentful and angry, huddled in their boxes (Women, Men, Blacks, “Hispanics,” Gays) all paranoid and ready to rage at the people in the next box over, or the one after that.
Rosalie
January 29th, 2014 @ 1:21 pm

That’s what I heard. But it’s the WH and DNC so they can get away with it. With them, it’s all talk.
Rosalie
January 29th, 2014 @ 1:25 pm

One thing’s for sure, their priority isn’t the economy.
Adjoran
January 29th, 2014 @ 5:26 pm

As RS’ experience shows, the “77% of what a man makes” is based on distorted stats. The FACT is that a woman with the same qualifications and years of experience makes as much or more than men with similar records.

The reason for the 77% is that the numbers include women who leave the work force temporarily to raise children or go back to school, then return, and do not adjust for years of work experience in comparing compensation.
DaveO
January 29th, 2014 @ 6:42 pm

The 2 laws that cover equal pay for equal work, of which Lily Ledbetter is the second, and weaker law, were passed too long ago to matter to Obama: he needs women fired up right now – donating time, money and trollery to GOTV among the younger women who weren’t of voting age when Lily Ledbetter was passed. Speaking of Lebbetter, another law passed on pure lies.
Obama’s SOTU doesn’t make sense to rational people – but it does to his base. The speech was a series of appeals to the Dem base to help retain the Senate.
If the GOP takes the Senate, AG Holder will resign and take up an important job outside the of the US.
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 6:51 pm

Because they…IT’S BUSH’S FAULT!
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 6:58 pm

and……..why did President Obama wait until his 6th year in office to address it?
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 7:02 pm

and…….the president was hoping that Congress would raise the minimum wage so that he would have to worry about it.
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 7:04 pm

He’s got a sure-fire fix for the economy, he’s just waiting until his 7th year in office to unveil it so that we’ll all remember him fondly when he leaves.
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 7:10 pm

+1 for the use of the word “trollery”!

And another +1 for using the words “Holder” and “outside of the US” in the same sentence.
I’m thinking Ecuador or Peru. (or Chicago)
AMartel
January 29th, 2014 @ 7:12 pm

His 7th year in office will be entirely devoted to opening his Presidential Library conveniently located in the 57th state, Lower Utopian Bullshitland. Anyone who disapproves will be shot and then audited.
Rosalie
January 29th, 2014 @ 7:14 pm

LOL!
cmdr358
January 29th, 2014 @ 8:08 pm

Uh-oh, there’s been another leak !
He’s going to be really pissed now. :-
Bob Belvedere
January 29th, 2014 @ 8:26 pm

Would you want to work for Lady Michbeth or, as most do, for Valerie Jarrett?
Bob Belvedere
January 29th, 2014 @ 8:30 pm

Bingo!

That is covered in one of the first chapters in the Leftist Playbook – Sowing Chaos.
Even Slate Doesn’t Believe Obama’s Pay Gap Myth | Blackmailers Don't Shoot
January 30th, 2014 @ 12:36 am

[…] The Other McCain: Obama Endorses Feminist Folly […]
K-Bob
January 30th, 2014 @ 3:12 am

Nailed it.

And what about women entrepreneurs? Totally ignored by this statistic. They work around the clock to be the next Debbi Fields. They don’t want “income equality.” They want to be prosperous.
Obama Endorses Feminist Folly : The Other McCain | Dead Citizen's Rights Society
January 30th, 2014 @ 11:24 am

[…] Obama Endorses Feminist Folly : The Other McCain. […]
You get paid for what you give | The Fog of Law
February 1st, 2014 @ 12:07 am

[…] So when the fifty-year-old President of the United States repeated the old canard about women being …, it was – well, not shocking, but still sad. If you want a cushy, safe office job that has you out the door at 5 pm sharp and doesn’t much mind when you stay at home with your sick kid, you’re going to pay for it – or rather, not get paid as well for it as you would for a job with longer hours, a more unpredictable schedule, and a heavier demand on your time. (Pointing out the obvious: if the latter job didn’t pay more, no one would bother doing it. Why clean toilets when you can throw pots or paint murals?) […]
FMJRA 2.0: Waiting For The Superb Owl : The Other McCain
February 2nd, 2014 @ 2:54 pm

[…] Obama Endorses Feminist Folly […]