Gender Wage Gap Revisited

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


“Give me a break,” John Stossel quips about the difference in wages between men and women. There’s no sexism here, he claims, citing a new book on the subject, it’s all about choices:

“Women themselves say they’re far more likely to care about flexibility,” says author Warren Farrell. “Men say, I’m far more likely to care about money.” … His research found that the wage gap exists not because of sexism, but because more men are willing to do certain kinds of jobs.

Well gee, I wonder why women need to be more concerned about flexibility when thinking about jobs. Surely not because they don’t get much support raising children, eh? And surely not because this country has wholly inadequate provisions for family leave. No, surely not. At any rate, Farrell may well be right that the wage gap isn’t due to gender discrimination—I haven’t read his book—although here’s an in-depth look at the issue that argues that the wage gap persists even after one accounts for all the usually-cited factors: job choice, hours worked, etc. etc. That’s very much worth a read. And even if Farrell’s right that job preferences account for the gap, it’s unlikely that this is because men are somehow “hardwired” to care more about money. The modern workplace, especially in the United States, isn’t exactly accomodating for women who want to try to raise a family. And pregnancy discrimination is still very much alive and kicking. Now Stossel claims that this is all “just.” But presumably he believes that the country also needs children if it wants to, you know, not run out of people. Ah, therein lies the problem.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest