Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

Gender pay gap 2019: Mixed results reveal architecture has ‘long way to go’

Comment

How long until the AJ realises that its insistence on propagating a tired gender pay gap inequality narrative that has been critiqued and debunked again and again just cements reader's opinions that it too has become part of an establishment propaganda routine. At least this time AJ has highlighted how errors in the way statistics are interpreted as well as a lack in consistent controlled variables can account for the inequality. That's before we even get to the fact that the clear differences in psychological traits in men and women result in both sexes ON AVERAGE gravitating toward vastly difference career paths, having different philosophies toward competition within the workplace, and work unequal hours. Then there is the fact that the majority of women decide starting a family is more important to them than climbing to the top of corporate ladder, and therefore choose part-time work or switch to a lower paid position/ or career with more flexible working hours. If you even stop and think about London for example which is where the majority of these practises are headquartered and base the majority of their employees. It is one of the most progressive capitals in the world that has done more than almost any other to overcome any kind of discrimination. Even if you took the regressive/brain-dead opinion then people who are progressive are the only ones who champion social justice, then the idea that systemic racism and sexism is rife in our liberal democracy, is totally laughable. Why do the neo-marxists insist that every inequality of outcome must be because of some vast structural injustice perpetrated against woman or minority groups? Put simply, it is because they can't except that not everyone has equal abilities and the idea that individuals and their life choices or even their cultures may result in inequality of outcome is too frightening to consider. Therefore it's just easier to blame it on sexist and/or racist patriarchal tyranny, resulting in policies that require so much social engineering that goes against the natural tendencies of men and women when allowed freedom to define their own path, that it quickly becomes destructive to productivity and the effectiveness of the economic system. Do woman really want to think that perhaps they only got a position because of their sex? Is that not destructive to their mental health if they consider that their skills and abilities are irrelevant when applying for a job position? Dare I say it, does that not turn women into a commodity? An object taken on by an office to signal their virtue? Critical thinking conveniently seems to fall short when questioning the ideology that gave birth to it.

Posted date

5 April, 2019

Posted time

12:48 pm

required
required
required
required