-1=e^ipi

The same time having a vagina became an accomplishment I guess. You said we should celebrate people that help bring down gender barriers. Bronies are doing this. Therefore, according to your earlier claim + consistency, they should be celebrated. This is because you fail to understand a position on gender issues outside of your traditionalist-feminist false dichotomy. So if they don't agree with you they must be misogynists!

I disagree with this portrayal of the past. It denies female agency in the way society was shaped, ignores male disposability, etc. Here is a question, if it was such a male dominated society with men having all this privilege, why where men doing the majority of dying in the wars? Wow, before my grandparents were born, discrimination happened, therefore we can somehow ignore all male issues. Progressive logic! I support people having equal rights under that law and do not support discrimination against people based on their sex, sexual orientation, race, etc. That's a position I hold, what do you mean by examples? Wait, I get it. Your progressive brain can't handle the concept that someone can take a position outside of the traditionalist-feminist false dichotomy. Don't blame me for creating a 'group'. Your 'group' created itself when it decides to not treat people equally on the basis of sex/gender. In that case, you should celebrate bronies because they are trying to create gender equality and break gender barriers.

Lol, what? Being made uncomfortable for being male while considering nursing = has redneck friends! On Guard for Thee logic! Because I am a gender egalitarian and I want to see the complete destruction of gender roles. You and others that are making a big deal over the sex/gender of the individual even though it shouldn't matter. Says the person dividing people the basis of sex as demonstrated in this thread... No, it makes more sense to treat everyone equally. I don't see you celebrating the existence of bronies for example. Why is that?

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Society is highly inhomogeneous and there are certain groups of men that face serious challenges. Support for men's rights issues are stronger than ever (although that isn't saying much). I certainty don't feel it is small enough to do nothing about. I don't think this is necessarily how it has to be. If you look at the groups that support men's rights issues, the ones gaining momentum are the non-traditionalist gender egalitarianism groups.

Well I have a male friend who was recently interested in going to nursing and was made very uncomfortable and singled out for being a male and as a result was completely discouraged from entering the field. It's 2015! That was 26 years ago. You realize that most millennials were not even born yet, right?

And men make up a small minority of nurses, psychologists, elementary school teachers, university students, and people that manage to live past the age of 70. But no one really cares to address these issues. Why do you think that is?

Because gender/sex shouldn't matter. The skill/ability of the individual should. Being a top pilot is an accomplishment regardless of if you are male, female or intersex.

... Women are the majority of the population. How are they a minority? Well I want it to be commonplace and not make a big deal over the gender/sex of the pilot. You guys are making a big deal over it. Now if someone were to swap men and women in your sentence and say it, they would get accused of being a misogynist and it would not be socially acceptable. But apparently it is completely socially acceptable to make claims about women being intrinsically better at something than men. It's 'empowering' I guess. Hurray for double standards!

Would you say the same thing if you replaced women with men and male with female? If not, why the double standard. But I guess females deserve more praise for similar accomplishments as males.

It's a human accomplishment. Congratulations to the individual on her accomplishments. The gender/sex of the person seems irrelevant though. No, but I have a bit of a problem with your constant gynocentric attitude. If a male succeeds in a female dominated area such as elementary school teaching, nursing, or now simply being a university student, do we go 'omg, congratulations on succeeding in a female dominated area!'? Not really. So why the double standard? Then let her be a pilot. Why does her gender/sex have anything to do with it?

She was born with a vagina. Therefore accomplishment according to WestCoastRunner.

But Eunuchs often have neither. Intersex people can have both.

Number of citations may be correlated with the other explanatory variables, but that doesn't mean that adding number of citations to the model won't soak up some of the unexplained variation and reduce the unexplained wage difference. Multicollinearity doesn't cause an OLS estimator to be biased nor does it cause the error estimate of the OLS estimator to be biased so it isn't a reason not to include other factors in the model. I don't know. Somewhere between 0% and 100% of the unexplained wage gap probably. But it is possible that the new factors would increase the gender wage gap or turn it negative. The raise being small doesn't justify doing the raise. Also, why not lower the salaries of the male professors, rather than raise the female professor wages? In any case, these other factors should have been taken into account in the study. But it was probably politically unfeasible for the decision maker to request that the study include these new factors; as that would cause misogynist claims against the decision maker and would risk the decision maker's job. I don't know how to take that into account, or if it is feasible to collect some sort of proxy for it. Sometimes you just have to do the best you can with the data available. Number of citations, number of papers published and hours worked per year are relatively easy to obtain, which is why I think the study should have included these factors.

By biological, do you mean phenotypical or genetic?

Because it can explain some of the differences in income between two groups of people. There is also precedence for it. Do you want a link to Marie Drolet from statscan explaining the relevance of using inadequate proxies of experience? It's an in adequate proxy. Seniority or Tenure may be correlated with number of citations or papers published, but excluding these other factors will result in less variation being explained by the model and therefore a larger 'unexplained' component of the model, which is often concluded to be discrimination. Checking number of citations or papers published isn't even that hard to do... Yes and faculty is already being controlled for. At this point, you seem to be arguing something along the lines of 'because we cannot have a perfect model that explains differences in income, we should make no efforts to improve the model used in the study to get a result that is closer to the truth'. By this logic seniority, tenure, faculty and age don't necessary indicate ability to do productive work, so let's just throw them out the window and do a Justin Trudeau model where you just divide two numbers and claim women early 77% of what men earn. But number of citations usually does. Do you have a better proxy to judge a professor's quality? If yes, what is it? If no, then why not just add number of citations to the model to have a better model than what was used by the original study?

So, you take the position that a post-op transwoman is not a man? What about Eunuchs? Are they not men? Even if they had to get genitals removed due to cancer? Where do intersex people fit into this?

Sigh the STEM argument. So I guess as long as women are less than 50% in engineering then they are being discriminated against or aren't being empowered enough. What about men being the minority in health degrees, education degrees, or pretty much the vast majority of fields except engineering? Oh, that doesn't matter apparently. And what about boys not having enough role models at an early age? In parts of Britain, 70% of households do not have a father (single mother households) and the vast majority of elementary school teachers are female (might have something to do with the stereotype that men are dangerous potential rapists that should be kept away from small children). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2359643/My-week-man-desert-In-parts-Britain-70-children-live-fathers-YASMIN-ALIBHAI-BROWN-visited-discovered-devastating-consequences.html WestCoastRunner, do you think that maybe females have a tenancy to prefer socialization and human interaction relative to men, that this difference has some basis in evolutionary psychology and natural selection under the hunter-gatherer society that most of human existence lived under, and that this can help explain why females are overrepresented in health & education degrees, but underrepresented in engineering? Apparently we call that women are discriminated against because they aren't the majority in STEM yet.

Thank you cybercoma. As expected, citations, papers published and hours per year worked are not taken into account. I'm not saying that there is no wage discrimination. But I doubt it is overstated due to not taking these factors into account.

But how are you defining 'guy'? It is not uncommon for a pre-op transwomen to use a female changeroom. Genetic sex != gender identity. If you wish to demonstrate that gender dysphoria is a mental illness than please back it up with evidence.

I know how these studies work. The $3,515 is what is unexplained by the model. This can be obtained using a simple regression, and Oaxaca decomposition or other techniques. If the model does not take into account all factors that can explain differences in income other than discrimination, then some of this unexplained difference, which is concluded to be discrimination, is not actually discrimination. Given that you listed the other factors in the model as 'seniority, tenure, faculty and age', I suspect that number of citations or papers published was not included (which may be a good indicator as to the amount of effort that different professors put in, which can explain differences in income). Also, based on past experience, often the proxy for experience is in adequate (example: the Mincerian model of experience doesn't take into account number of hours per year worked in the past), and can understate the experience difference between males and females. Asking if such a study has taken into account all relevant parameters is very common.

Isn't that the whole point of an anonymous forum? Why stop there then? Why not make it so that everyone knows eachother's real name, address, CV, etc.? But we all are anonymous...

I have a better idea. Referendum ASAP and let's make Canada a Republic. I'm sure that most people in Quebec would agree with me. If the existence of the monarchy is a burden and is unfair to the Royal Family, then that is all the more reason to abolish it.

We can always pretend to agree.

That must be due to the 'rape culture' that 'feminists' keep telling me about. *sarcasm* But seriously, this is an anonymous internet forum. You are anonymous. I am anonymous. Everyone is anonymous. No one knows anyone else. Why should it matter who is and who is not online? Just post when you want to. Read other posts when you want to. If anything, you should be glad that someone wants to have a discussion with you. I have a better idea. How about we create a feminist safe space thread in the the sex and gender issues forum (which I still think should be renamed to sex, gender and social justice issues) where no one is allows to disagree with feminist dogma and we all just have to listen and believe? Then you can state your opinion, have other feminists join in and tell you how correct you are, and all us ignorant peons can become enlightened. Would that make you feel better?

What is 'tonight's fight' that you are referring to?