Its amazing to me that someone can claim "its not due to sexism" and then, in the very same sentence, make a long list of how its due to sexism. But its somehow ok.
how is it sexism that nurses get paid less than office workers? thats wage inequality, not sexism.
And honestly, women tend to be more amicable... thats a trait thats hard to have if you want to get higher in the work hierachy, as thats often gained by walking over other people.
take a step back and reread his comment. each of his points are valid.
There are many reasons for this, and the argument is that not all of this can be attributed to direct 'sexist' (bad) practices, but are instead the result of preferences that are more common to women than men (while this is indeed gendered, the accusation of 'discrimination' is more complex - if you somehow convinced all women to share identical preferences to men, these 'preference' differences would effectively disappear)
[0] https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bolotnyy/files/be_genderga...
1.) population outcomes being different are okay because men win
2.) population outcomes are different because women don't want certain careers
3.) promotions are fair
The problem is that I didn't make any of those points, nor do I believe them.
You can't make the case that our arguments are symmetrical, because they're not. Yours is an assertion, mine is a claim of insufficient evidence to substantiate your claim. The burden of proof is yours. I'm not making the claim that all population outcomes are the result of biology and everything is perfectly fair, you seem to just believe that this is my claim. What I'm actually saying is that I have a problem with an ideological position which assumes in the absence (or sometimes in the presence of) alternative explanations for why populations arrive at different outcomes, there is a tendency to be satisfied with a de facto position stating that outcomes are necessarily due to sociological forces, specifically patriarchy/sexism/racism. I'm saying that this is a totally unjustifiable position to work off of as a baseline. Working backwards from default conclusions, particularly when it comes to things that are as complicated as this, is not an acceptable strategy.