Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!flink
From: flink@umcp-cs.UUCP (Paul V. Torek)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: Comparable worth
Message-ID: <393@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Jun-85 18:13:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.393
Posted: Fri Jun 21 18:13:41 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Jun-85 04:46:30 EDT
References: <482@ttidcc.UUCP> <8203@ucbvax.ARPA> <ucbvax.8204> <457@unc.UUCP> <2126@ut-sally.UUCP>
Reply-To: flink@maryland.UUCP (Paul V. Torek)
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath net.women:6034 net.politics:9541
Summary: it stinks

In article <2126@ut-sally.UUCP> riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) writes:
>>The fallacy of the equal-pay-for-equal-work idea is that it compares
>>only the paychecks and level of skill and training required.  If we do not
>>also factor in the safety, pleasantness, and emotional effects of the job,
>>then this plan is likely to create more unfairness than it rectifies.
>
>Sorry, but I don't buy it.  Many of the jobs which are de facto "women's
>work" are not only low-paying, but they are high-stress, low-satisfaction
>shit work as well.

Actually, the fallacy of comparable worth is that it ignores -- I hate to
say it -- supply and demand.  Supply:  especially, the regrettable facts
that women choose "women's work" jobs because 1) it is considered "women's
work", and thus social pressure moves women to take those jobs; 2) the
jobs may be considered "better" because it is assumed, rightly or wrongly,
that (e.g.) nursing serves humanity better than (e.g.) garbage collecting,
and women may (probably due to our culture) value compassion more than men;
3) girls are discouraged from certain subjects (math) and encouraged to
do well in others; etc., etc., etc.

Discrimination probably does cause part of the wage gap, but -- there must
be a better way.
			--Paul V. Torek, Iconbuster-in-chief