A day without brains – I mean women

I truly wonder what other people from countries around the world think of us when they see pictures like the one below at this site.  This represents the "Day Without A Woman" rallies being held throughout the country.  These pictures come from ground zero – the Bay Area.

 

First there is the vacuous "Love is Love," whatever that means.  Then there is "Take Your Broken Heart.  Make It Into Art."  Another inane remark.  The lady holding up "Liar in Chief is NOT My President" wouldn't be talking about President Obama – would she?  After all, he was the one who was paying less to his female employees.  It was the British Daily Mail, who asserted:

All of President Barack Obama's employees may not be treated equally in the White House, as recently released financial records show that female employees earn significantly less than their male counterparts.  Using the 2011 annual report of White House staff salaries that was submitted to Congress, an $11,000 difference is clear between the median female employee salary and the median male employee salary.

As if this visual display were not enough, we also have men wearing pussy caps who feel compelled to state, "[M]en of quality fight for equality."  There is the obligatory triad of a hijab-hooded Muslim, a black woman and a play on "Rosie the Riveter" of World War II vintage.  The beatifically smiling woman holding up "Our Minds, Our Bodies, Our Power" appears proud to be using the Black Lives Matter slogan that has resulted in so much destruction against shopkeepers and police officers.

What the leaders of this march would like folks to believe is that women are critical components in maintaining the economy – as if (emphasis intended) businesses, marketing executives, and advertising agencies do not already know this and spend millions of dollars reaching out to this demographic.  Harley-Davidson Motorcycles, for example, has specifically marketed to women in the past few years.

Kay S. Hymowitz lays out a cogent description concerning the alleged gender pay differences and explains why the argument is not quite as clear-cut as these demonstrators would make it seem. 

No, you can't rule out discrimination. Neither can you rule out other, equally plausible explanations for the 7 percent gap. The data available to researchers may not be precise; for instance, it's extremely difficult to find accurate measures of work experience. There's also a popular theory that women are less aggressive than men when it comes to negotiating salaries.

The point is that we don't know the reason—or, more likely, reasons—for the seven percent gap. What we do know is that making discrimination the default explanation for a wage gap, as proofers want us to do, leads us down some weird rabbit holes. Asian men and women earn more than white men and women do, says the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Does that mean that whites are discriminated against in favor of Asians? Female cafeteria attendants earn more than male ones do. Are men discriminated against in that field? Women who work in construction earn almost exactly what men in the field do, while women in education earn considerably less. The logic of default discrimination would lead us to conclude that construction workers are more open to having female colleagues than educators are. With all due respect to the construction workers, that seems unlikely.

So why do women work fewer hours, choose less demanding jobs, and then earn less than men do? The answer is obvious: kids. A number of researchers have found that if you consider only childless women, the wage gap disappears. June O'Neill, an economist who has probably studied wage gaps as much as anyone alive, has found that single, childless women make about 8 percent more than single, childless men do (though the advantage vanishes when you factor in education). Using Census Bureau data of pay levels in 147 of the nation's 150 largest cities, the research firm Reach Advisors recently showed that single, childless working women under 30 earned 8 percent more than their male counterparts did.

That's likely to change as soon as the children arrive. Mothers, particularly those with young children, take more time off from work; even when they are working, they're on the job less. Behind the Pay Gap found that 'among women who graduated from college in 1992–93, more than one-fifth (23 percent) of mothers were out of the work force in 2003, and another 17 percent were working part time,' compared with under 2 percent of fathers in each case. Other studies show consistently that the first child significantly reduces a woman's earnings and that the second child cuts them even further.

This is also confirmed by economist Thomas Sowell at this YouTube site.

But this doesn't matter to our pink-hatted warriors.  And that is because many of the sponsors of this march used it as a smokescreen to hide their true intentions.

Confirmed speakers for the "A Day Without A Woman" included:

  • District 4 supervisor Katy Tang and District 9 supervisor Hillary Ronen
  • Maria Trujillo, executive board member of SEIU United Service Workers West
  • Shannon Coulter, cofounder of the #GRABYOURWALLET, whose aim is to boycott all retailers who sell Trump family products
  • Diana Macasa of San Francisco United Against Trump
  • Conny Ford, campaign director for SF CLOUT/San Francisco Labor Council

These are left-wing organizations that despise capitalism and want to demolish it.  In addition, the "group's organizers represent the who's who of the radical left but two stand out as among the worst of a rancid bunch."  Art Lieberman explains that "[t]he first is Angela Davis, a former Black Panther radical, unrepentant Marxist, notorious supporter of the BDS movement and purveyor of anti-Semitic canards, including the false claim that Israel practices Apartheid against Arabs."

The other one is:

Rasmieh Odeh. According to published reports, this vile woman has at least nine aliases. She was a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and in 1969, helped place a bomb in a Jerusalem supermarket that killed two Jewish youth in their early 20s. She served 10 years for her role in the plot but was released in a prisoner swap. Eventually, Odeh made her way to the U.S. where she fraudulently obtained citizenship by lying about her past during the naturalization process. Her criminal case is currently pending before the federal courts."

Furthermore:

With malevolent organizers like that, it comes as no surprise that among the group's litany of demands is a call for 'the decolonization of Palestine' and the dismantling of 'all walls, from prison walls to border walls, from Mexico to Palestine.' It is rather ironic that a feminist protest, which ostensibly seeks to advance woman's [sic] rights, chooses a platform that delegitimizes and demonizes the only nation in the Mideast that protects women's rights.

If these so-called advocates of women's empowerment were truly compassionate and sentient beings, they would realize that by hurting the American economy, they only adversely affect the bottom line of companies who then need to adjust their pool of laborers, or cut back on pay raises and bonuses, which then hurts the women who could not or would not engage in the march.  It also adds an additional burden to those who are now asked to pick up the slack.  Economics 101, anyone?

Instead of truly tackling the age old challenge of balancing outside work with the vitally important care of family, people should be educated to understand the parameters of how economics works instead of marching hand in hand with those who expressly wish to destroy capitalism, an economic system which has uplifted so many from poverty, as explained by economist Walter Williams at this Prager U site.

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

I truly wonder what other people from countries around the world think of us when they see pictures like the one below at this site.  This represents the "Day Without A Woman" rallies being held throughout the country.  These pictures come from ground zero – the Bay Area.

 

First there is the vacuous "Love is Love," whatever that means.  Then there is "Take Your Broken Heart.  Make It Into Art."  Another inane remark.  The lady holding up "Liar in Chief is NOT My President" wouldn't be talking about President Obama – would she?  After all, he was the one who was paying less to his female employees.  It was the British Daily Mail, who asserted:

All of President Barack Obama's employees may not be treated equally in the White House, as recently released financial records show that female employees earn significantly less than their male counterparts.  Using the 2011 annual report of White House staff salaries that was submitted to Congress, an $11,000 difference is clear between the median female employee salary and the median male employee salary.

As if this visual display were not enough, we also have men wearing pussy caps who feel compelled to state, "[M]en of quality fight for equality."  There is the obligatory triad of a hijab-hooded Muslim, a black woman and a play on "Rosie the Riveter" of World War II vintage.  The beatifically smiling woman holding up "Our Minds, Our Bodies, Our Power" appears proud to be using the Black Lives Matter slogan that has resulted in so much destruction against shopkeepers and police officers.

 

What the leaders of this march would like folks to believe is that women are critical components in maintaining the economy – as if (emphasis intended) businesses, marketing executives, and advertising agencies do not already know this and spend millions of dollars reaching out to this demographic.  Harley-Davidson Motorcycles, for example, has specifically marketed to women in the past few years.

Kay S. Hymowitz lays out a cogent description concerning the alleged gender pay differences and explains why the argument is not quite as clear-cut as these demonstrators would make it seem. 

No, you can't rule out discrimination. Neither can you rule out other, equally plausible explanations for the 7 percent gap. The data available to researchers may not be precise; for instance, it's extremely difficult to find accurate measures of work experience. There's also a popular theory that women are less aggressive than men when it comes to negotiating salaries.

The point is that we don't know the reason—or, more likely, reasons—for the seven percent gap. What we do know is that making discrimination the default explanation for a wage gap, as proofers want us to do, leads us down some weird rabbit holes. Asian men and women earn more than white men and women do, says the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Does that mean that whites are discriminated against in favor of Asians? Female cafeteria attendants earn more than male ones do. Are men discriminated against in that field? Women who work in construction earn almost exactly what men in the field do, while women in education earn considerably less. The logic of default discrimination would lead us to conclude that construction workers are more open to having female colleagues than educators are. With all due respect to the construction workers, that seems unlikely.

So why do women work fewer hours, choose less demanding jobs, and then earn less than men do? The answer is obvious: kids. A number of researchers have found that if you consider only childless women, the wage gap disappears. June O'Neill, an economist who has probably studied wage gaps as much as anyone alive, has found that single, childless women make about 8 percent more than single, childless men do (though the advantage vanishes when you factor in education). Using Census Bureau data of pay levels in 147 of the nation's 150 largest cities, the research firm Reach Advisors recently showed that single, childless working women under 30 earned 8 percent more than their male counterparts did.

That's likely to change as soon as the children arrive. Mothers, particularly those with young children, take more time off from work; even when they are working, they're on the job less. Behind the Pay Gap found that 'among women who graduated from college in 1992–93, more than one-fifth (23 percent) of mothers were out of the work force in 2003, and another 17 percent were working part time,' compared with under 2 percent of fathers in each case. Other studies show consistently that the first child significantly reduces a woman's earnings and that the second child cuts them even further.

This is also confirmed by economist Thomas Sowell at this YouTube site.

But this doesn't matter to our pink-hatted warriors.  And that is because many of the sponsors of this march used it as a smokescreen to hide their true intentions.

Confirmed speakers for the "A Day Without A Woman" included:

  • District 4 supervisor Katy Tang and District 9 supervisor Hillary Ronen
  • Maria Trujillo, executive board member of SEIU United Service Workers West
  • Shannon Coulter, cofounder of the #GRABYOURWALLET, whose aim is to boycott all retailers who sell Trump family products
  • Diana Macasa of San Francisco United Against Trump
  • Conny Ford, campaign director for SF CLOUT/San Francisco Labor Council

These are left-wing organizations that despise capitalism and want to demolish it.  In addition, the "group's organizers represent the who's who of the radical left but two stand out as among the worst of a rancid bunch."  Art Lieberman explains that "[t]he first is Angela Davis, a former Black Panther radical, unrepentant Marxist, notorious supporter of the BDS movement and purveyor of anti-Semitic canards, including the false claim that Israel practices Apartheid against Arabs."

The other one is:

Rasmieh Odeh. According to published reports, this vile woman has at least nine aliases. She was a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and in 1969, helped place a bomb in a Jerusalem supermarket that killed two Jewish youth in their early 20s. She served 10 years for her role in the plot but was released in a prisoner swap. Eventually, Odeh made her way to the U.S. where she fraudulently obtained citizenship by lying about her past during the naturalization process. Her criminal case is currently pending before the federal courts."

Furthermore:

With malevolent organizers like that, it comes as no surprise that among the group's litany of demands is a call for 'the decolonization of Palestine' and the dismantling of 'all walls, from prison walls to border walls, from Mexico to Palestine.' It is rather ironic that a feminist protest, which ostensibly seeks to advance woman's [sic] rights, chooses a platform that delegitimizes and demonizes the only nation in the Mideast that protects women's rights.

If these so-called advocates of women's empowerment were truly compassionate and sentient beings, they would realize that by hurting the American economy, they only adversely affect the bottom line of companies who then need to adjust their pool of laborers, or cut back on pay raises and bonuses, which then hurts the women who could not or would not engage in the march.  It also adds an additional burden to those who are now asked to pick up the slack.  Economics 101, anyone?

Instead of truly tackling the age old challenge of balancing outside work with the vitally important care of family, people should be educated to understand the parameters of how economics works instead of marching hand in hand with those who expressly wish to destroy capitalism, an economic system which has uplifted so many from poverty, as explained by economist Walter Williams at this Prager U site.

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

RECENT VIDEOS