“An analysis of census data by consumer research firm Reach Advisors found that women between the ages of 22 and 30, without children, had bigger paychecks in 2008 than their male peers in 47 of the 50 largest U.S. cities. Their wages were 8 percent higher, on average, but varied considerably from one city to the next.” 1.

“But now there’s evidence that the ship may finally be turning around: according to a new analysis of 2,000 communities by a market research company, in 147 out of 150 of the biggest cities in the U.S., the median full-time salaries of young women are 8% higher than those of the guys in their peer group.” 2.

“Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn.—-Among unmarried college-educated men and women between 40 and 64, men earn nearly 15 percent less.” 3.

Fortune Magazine asserts that American women own 65% of the wealth in the USA.  4.

“Senior women 50 and older control $19 trillion and own more than three-forth’s of the nation’s financial wealth. -MassMutual Financial Group-2007” 5.

“Women control about $19 trillion of wealth, including earned and inherited assets, which accounts for more than three-quarters of our nation’s financial resources.” 6.

“A new study from Continuum’s Women Children Group and supported by data from the World Bank speaks to the power of pink.

The study claims that women now control 65% of global spending and more than 80% of U.S. spending. By 2014, the World Bank predicts that the global income of women will grow by more than $5 trillion. The story warns of the perils of ignoring female consumers who control $20 trillion in consumer spending. They make the final decision for buying 91% of home purchases, 65 % of the new cars, and 66% of computers.”  7.

“Although women are a majority of the workforce, perhaps as many as 80 per cent of the jobs lost (in the past recession) were held by men.—- A recent study found that 55 percent of men 18 to 24 are living in their parents homes as are 13 percent of men 25 to 34 compared to 8 percent of women.” 8.

As stated before in the chapter on Government and Feminism: “Through laws, customs, and feminist dogma, if a male demonstrates any of these (male) virtues, American women can and will destroy him by lying about abuse, rape, verbal haranguing, anything; and, he can be arrested, prosecuted, and maliciously convicted of a crime. This is the case even if she has a historical pattern of lying because the “system” does not want to take any chances.” Women, through other laws, customs, and feminist dogma have the means and motive to discriminate against men who exhibit the male virtues. The men’s rights movement now, generally, accepts the proposition that women, at least American women, especially target men who exhibit the traditional male virtues for discrimination and oppression.

The result of the aforementioned, is that women, in the workforce, tend to only tolerate weak, base, and effeminate men in the same. As stated in the chapter entitled: “Biology and Gender”: ” Using brain mapping, it was shown that men have more than 6 times the amount of gray matter related to general intelligences than women ,and women have nearly 10 times as much white matter related to intelligence than men.” 9.

“Gray matter is responsible for processing information in the brain and white matter “represents the connections between these processing center according to the study.
These differences might explain why men ” excel in tasks requiring more local processing like mathematics-while women tend to excel at integrating and assimilating information.” 10.

“There is a mean difference in mean IQ (in favor of men) of about 5 points. The further you go up the distribution the more skewed it becomes. There are twice as many men with an IQ of 120 plus as there are women. There are 30 times the number of men with an IQ of 170-plus as there are women.” 11.

“IQ stands for intelligence quotient.  Supposedly, it is a score that tells one how “bright” a person is compared to other people. The average IQ is by definition 100; scores above 100 indicate a higher than average IQ and scores below 100 indicate a lower than average IQ.  Theoretically, scores can range any amount below or above 100; but in practice they do not meaningfully go much below 50 or above 150. Half of the population have IQ’s of between 90 and 110 while twenty five percent have higher IQ’s and twenty five percent have lower IQ’s.” 12.

 Our political-economic-legal system, through overt, covert, informal, and legal mean, gives preferential treatment to women and minorities who tend to have, on average, significantly lower I.Q.’s than Caucasian men.

Both legal and illegal immigration to the U.S.A. tend to promulgate immigration to the U.S.A. of individuals of lower I.Q.’s who, because the great majority of the same are minorities and/or women receive preferential treatment by law and custom in education, employment, and otherwise over American citizens, mainly Caucasian men (and some Asian groups) who have higher IQ’s on average.

This book concentrates, however, on gender issues.

The effect of discriminating against Caucasian men (and some Asian groups)  in employment, education, and otherwise, in the favor of women (and others) is, therefore, to decrease the true intelligence level of the workforce with the concomitant decrease in the educational, skill, knowledge, maturity level of the general work force. The wealth and prosperity of nations has been directly correlated to the average I.Q. in a nation. The natural  economic result of the aforementioned discrimination against Caucasian men (and some Asian groups) has been a decline or stagnation in real incomes for Americans, increases in the poverty rate, a decrease in economic security for all Americans, and, of course, a decrease in the wealth and prosperity of the U.S.A. as a nation and for American citizens in particular.

‘Yet ironically, America is making yet more efforts to exacerbate anti-male sexism in our economy.  Last year, President Obama created a well-funded Council on Women and Girls but rejected one on men and boys.— In Obama’s April 6,  2012 speech at the White House Forum on Women and the Economy, he reiterated that he wants to focus yet more on women: ” (I) look forward to continuing the important work we are doing to promote the interests of women.” 13.

The 77 cents-on-the-dollar statistic is calculated in a manner that is biased against men.  

“For example, while among all physicians, men earn more than women, men are more likely to be in specialties requiring longer training, high-stress, and irregular hours, for example, surgery and cardiology. In contrast, women are more likely to be pediatricians. Despite that bias, across all careers, surveys report that childless women under 30 make more than men.  More than 90 percent of workplace deaths, military deaths, and severe workplace injuries (e.g., amputations, black lung disease) occur to men.  Such dangerous work justifies higher pay for men.  Visit American workplaces, especially major corporations, and you’ll find anti-men practices are not only tolerated but routinely imposed by employers.  Women, but not men, are encouraged to form committees and caucuses to advance their sex’s causes in the workplace, often at men’s expense.  Examples: 1. Mentor programs for women only 2. Special training for women only 3. Fast-track-to-executive position for women only”. 14.

Dr. Warren Warren Farrell in his book

Why Men Earn More, uncovered numerous reason for the pay gap. Inclusive of the same are: ” Men overwhelmingly dominate jobs that 1. are in an unpleasant environment (sanitation v. child care); 2. required harder-to-attain skills (physics vs. philosophy); 3. require longer work hours; 3. demand financial risk (entrepreneur vs. teaching); 4. an inconvenient (i.e., relocation); and, 5, are hazardous (construction vs. librarian).” “Due to the simple laws of supply and demand, these occupations pay more and contribute immensely to the pay gap. But again, government statistics completely neglect occupation-making a raw comparison of all working men and women instead (e.g., the female receptionist is lumped in with the $ 21,000/hr Lebron James and little-guy Michael Moore). “Wage gap statistics also do not account for time commitment.  On average, women work far less than men because they choose to have much more balance in their lives. A study by the Center for Policy Alternatives and Lifetime Television found that nearly 85 percent of women took advantage of flexible work arrangements offered by their employers. And, a decade after graduating college, 39 percent of women leave the work force or work part-time, versus 3 percent of men. Aside from the obvious benefits of working longer, workers who average 44 or more hours per week earn approximately 100 percent more than workers who average 40 hours.

This is particularly significant, as it touches on the glass ceiling myth. Now, normally the burden of proof is placed on the accusers, but not so with progressives’ ad hominem attacks–making honest debate virtually impossible. —-June O’Neill, former direct of the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), argues that if you take out the effects of marriage and child rearing, essentially, there is no earnings gap.

Also commemorating “Women’s Equality Day” was Bill Singler on the Huffington Post. Although Singler never quite explains why, he does not buy into the “choice” argument and derides a Chamber of Commerce blog for supposing otherwise, even resorting to capitalism and family values to propagate the wage gap myth. Contrary to the “bedrock of American capitalism,” he claims that these choices are often “forced upon women.” (Isn’t “choice” supposed to be a major platform of the Democratic Party?)

Columnist Marty Nemko speaks to this anecdotal fallacy:
Steven Rhoades, author of the new book, Taking Sex Differences Seriously, cites study after study indicating that the main reason most women want ample family time is their biological drive to have children and be the primary family caregiver. Feminist activists argue that is social conditioning by the “male hegemony.” But if that were true, then why do women take on most family care giving in every society from Iceland to New Guinea, in every era from ancient times to today, and in all political contexts from communist to capitalist?  Women’s desire to prioritize family care giving is mainly biological predisposition, not cultural brainwashing.”
 (American Thinker, September 18, 2010, The Wage Gap Myth, by Anthony Kang) President Barack Obama has certainly done his part to exploit the wage gap; he most recently endorsed the Paycheck Fairness Act, calling it a “commonsense bill.” Daniel Fisher of Forbes and James Sherk from the Heritage Foundation illustrate why the act is anything but. Guess who stands to gain the most from the act?  You got it — big government and trial lawyers.

In another recent Huffington Post article

The ACLU’s Deborah J. Vagins literally equates the Paycheck Fairness Act to the suffrage movement, labeling it “the next milestone in the fight for equal rights.” Vagins concludes, “I feel compelled to ask: how long must women wait for equality?  I hope my question is answered, as it once was 90 years ago, with a landmark achievement in equal rights.” 15.

The right to vote, which, for women, has resulted in the economic discrimination against men and for women described in this chapter because women make up the electoral majority in our “winner take all”, “gerrymandered” and “bought” form of political electoral representation which is , in essence, a tyrannical feminist majority.

“Apparently Dr. Farrell is equally compelled and moved by the right to vote. Making note of the military’s draft and combat policies, Farrell harshly denounces these diminutive minds:  “Women are the only group who get the right to vote without responsibility. Only adolescents expect rights without responsibilities. Adults know they go together.” Note: Farrell was a three-time board member of NOW.

To further illustrate the lunacy surrounding the purported wage gap, let’s flip the situation on its head. If right-wingers adopted the left wing’s politics of victimhood, entitlement, divisiveness, and envy, if right-wing males were like left-wing females, if the media were an echo chamber of conservative bias, and if universities were ground zero for right-wing indoctrination, one could easily be led to believe there is a very real and systemic pattern of gender discrimination against males. Consider: 
1. Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn. 2. There are some 80 fields where women earn more than men. 3. About 80 percent of the jobs lost in the last recession were lost by men. 4. Males are exponentially more likely to become incarcerated or homeless. 5. Males disproportionately sacrifice much of their prime years in service of the military. 6. The male-to-female ratio on college campuses is now about 40/60.  7. Approximately 93 percent of workplace fatalities are men. 8. Among unmarried college-educated men and women between 40 and 64, men earn nearly 15 percent less. ” 16.

In an article, written by Krystal Steinmetz, entitled: “Young Men Earn Much Less Now Than in 1973” which appeared in the online MoneyTalksNews on May 13, 2014, describes the dramatic decline in American men’s median income since 1973.

The body of this article states:  “Young American Men Earn Much Less Now Than in 1973.Men’s median income is on the decline. It’s depressing, but true.  Cheryl Russell of the New Strategist Press writes that, according to Census information, men ages 25 to 34 actually earn less than they did 40 years ago. Among all American men, ages 15 and older, median income peaked in 2000, at $37,791. After adjusting for inflation, men’s median income fell 10 percent from 2000 to 2012, to $33,904. While a 10 percent drop in income sounds terrible, it gets worse when you break it down by age groups, Russell said.  Check out these sad statistics for the percentage change in men’s median income from the year it peaked to 2012 (adjusted for inflation):  Ages 25-34. Down 27 percent. Peaked in 1973. Ages 35-44. Down 19 percent. Peaked in 1973. Ages 45-54. Down 17 percent. Peaked in 1999. Ages 55-64. Down 13 percent. Peaked in 2003.  Russell said:  The median income of men aged 25 to 34 has plunged since 1973, falling from $46,598 to $34,113 after adjusting for inflation — a loss of $12,485. Men aged 35 to 44 have lost $10,345 since their peak. Men aged 45 to 54 have lost $9,762, and men aged 55 to 64 have lost $6,407.” 17.

The following is a partial quote from a Wikipedia article entitled “Male Unemployment”:

“The  2008–2012 global recession has been called a “mancession” because of the disproportionate number of men who lost their jobs as compared to women. This gender gap became wide in the United States in 2009, when 10.5% of men in the labor force were unemployed, compared with 8% of women. Three quarters of the jobs lost in the recession in the U.S. were held by men.” 18.

“Given these facts, it wouldn’t be very hard to convince a young, apolitical, and impressionable college student, like I was, that all males are helpless victims, would it? 

Any blind ideologue can nitpick a few facts here and there to fit her agenda, and all anybody can do is debunk one disgusting, unsubstantiated myth at a time. Says Dr. Farrell, “My research indicates that, overall, when men and women do precisely the same work, women now get paid as much, or more than men.”
“Women need men like a fish needs a bicycle, “strong” and “independent” feminists like to say. How any group so helplessly dependent on the patriarchal teat of Uncle Sam can claim to be “strong” and “independent” is laughable at best. As the wage gap myth clearly demonstrates, the biggest irony of it all is the fact that modern-day feminists are the very antithesis.” 19.  

Given the aforementioned, the following is an appropriate and pertinent quote from William Shakespeare’s play, “Richard III” (Act V. scene iii):

“King Richard III: Give me another horse,—bind up my wounds,—Have mercy, Jesu!—Soft! I did but dream.—O coward conscience, how dost thou afflict me!—The lights burn blue.—It is now dead midnight.Cold fearful drops stand on my trembling flesh.What, do I fear myself? there’s none else by:Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I.Is there a murderer here? No;—yes, I am:Then fly. What, from myself? Great reason why,—Lest I revenge. What,—myself upon myself!Alack, I love myself. Wherefore? for any good That I myself have done unto myself?O, no! alas, I rather hate myself For hateful deeds committed by myself!I am a villain: yet I lie, I am not.Fool, of thyself speak well:—fool, do not flatter.My conscience hath a thousand several tongues,And every tongue brings in a several tale,And every tale condemns me for a villain. Perjury, perjury, in the high’st degree;Murder, stern murder, in the dir’st degree;All several sins, all us’d in each degree,Throng to the bar, crying all “Guilty! guilty!”I shall despair. There is no creature loves me;And if I die no soul will pity me: And wherefore should they,—since that I myself Find in myself no pity to myself?Methought the souls of all that I had murder’d Came to my tent; and every one did threat To-morrow’s vengeance on the head of Richard.”  20.

Source: americangentleman