Restaurants to drop prices for women to reflect wage disparity

Separate sections, too, just like in Muslim countries. Only the women pay less for the same food, have three times as many bathrooms (kept in much better condition), and more amenities and wait staff. Never mind the debunking of the wage myth. That is an inconvenient truth, not to be acted upon, of course.

But heck, no need to even allow men and women into the same bloody restaurants. Women-only restaurants seem to be the logical solution, with cut-rate prices across the board. Men can eat in the diner down the road if they like. You know, the old one with the broken neon signs. Perhaps they too need to start their own "Womantown" out there in Oregon.

The 1950s worried about 'creeping socialism'. The 2000s needs to be worried about 'creeping separatism'-- unless of course you're a feminist, in which case, hey, it's called "progress"!

Will these manhaters start assaulting women at random on the streets and stuffing them into dangerous machinery in workplaces at some point too? After all, men are far more likely to die due to all forms of violence and account for 90%+ of workplace fatalities. According to these lunatics any inequality is the evil patriarchy's work, so I'm sure they'll get started equalizing these other male "advantages" too.

I assume they'll also be calling for women to be taken off life support and denied treatment in hospitals and old-age homes too, since women have an unfair advantage in life expectancy, which must be more evidence of the patriarchy's nefarious plans.

I'm being facetious of course. But if they want equality, I say they should do it right.

Good job guys. Screw half of your customer base in an outright sexist way. That way when you lose half your revenue, you will be forced to raise prices. Meanwhile, the diners across the street are making a killing and didn't even have to drop prices or increase advertisements! I say let the idiots drive themselves out of business.

The lower restaurant prices for women are utterly ridiculous and sexist. I hope it backfires against the restaurant owners.

As far as research on the pay gap, Warren Farrell (Why Men Earn More) has already done a good job on that. I suspect that almost any gender pay gap research coming out of academia will argue that anti-female discrimination accounts for most of the pay difference. These feminist professors start out with the conviction that women are victims of unfair wage discrimination and then they do "advocacy research" to reinforce their pre-existing political positions. I have far more confidence in the objectivity and thoroughness of Warren Farrell's research than in that of the university professors, even if they are economists.

One professor I know of who has recently completed a study, even argues that women are almost as likely as men to take the most dangerous jobs. She also claims that family and childcare responsibilities don't explain much of the pay gap. In my view she has little credibility.

Most meals in restaurants consumed by women are paid for by men. Not many women would pass up a free meal for one they have to pay for themselves even if it is discounted.

I don't live in Oregon, but if I did, I certainly wouldn't eat at those restaurants.

Perhaps men who live in Oregon should send e-mails to the individual restaurants explaining their displeasure and why they have decided to boycott them and then offer a link to Farrell's book at Amazon.

I remember in University, one of the women's organizations selling burgers. They were $2 a piece for males, and $1 a piece for females. I ended up arranging for some female friends of mine to start buying the burgers and selling them to the men on the side for $1.10 (them pocketing the $0.10).

Turns out $1 was a loss and the group was planning on making its profits off the men.

I got chased halfway across campus before the caught me. I was always amused that campus security didn't give a crap that I had been beaten up. They simply told me I shouldn't have egged the group on.

Maybe, for the guys living in the area, its time for your girlfriends/wives to take you out to dinner.
__________________________________________________
http://www.vius.ca

If a woman assaults you, fight back with every last ounce of your strength. Nobody's going to help you, not the police, not other men, not other women. Even if you were attacked the odds are good that you'll be charged with an offense.

You're on your own, so protect yourself.

Self employed women only make 49% of what men do. All other factors are corrected for in that statistic - the woman works only for herself, on her own initiative and at her own level of productivity. The evil patriarchy never enters the equation.

Therefore, we can conclude that women are in fact slightly less than half as productive as men.

Average women earn 77% of what average men do?

They're being overpaid by an average of 28%.

Maybe, for the guys living in the area, its time for your girlfriends/wives to take you out to dinner.

Good idea, Kavius,

It would be interesting to see how long this nonsense lasts as such a pricing differential is unlikely to be profitable (in fact, few, if any, politicing by business is).

I predict that a lot of bargain-hunting couples will take up your suggestion and dispatch the lady to pick up a take out order or be the one to pay for a delivery order. That's exactly what I would do if any place in Chicagoland tried that nonsense.

I suspect that if the disparity is that high (49%), they are not doing the same types of jobs or working the same hours? Can't compare apples to oranges.

-ax

That stat is from Warren Farrell's stuff (I'll try and find out where he got it).

Besides feminists delight in comparing apples (men) to oranges (women). Can't let them have all the fun.

Apples and oranges - that's sort of the the whole POINT, don't you think? Oranges only earn 77% of what apples do so it must be because the apples are discriminating against the oranges. It couldn't have anything whatsoever to do with the intrinsic capabilities or choices of apples and oranges. That's feminist "logic" for you.

Women choose less stressful, lower-risk, easier work when given the opportunity and then they put fewer hours into whatever they're doing. That's why their own damned choices make them about 1/2 as productive as men when we eliminate all the other factors except the woman's productivity - they choose to work less, and in safer environments. Nobody's forcing them to do so. They have nobody to blame but themselves when they're self-employed.

Get where I'm coming from now?

I called it comparing apples to oranges, PRECISELY BECAUSE that is what Farrell calls it (at least effectively). What I am saying is, did the 49% take that into account, i.e. the difference in hours, job type etc? It doesn't say in your initial post.
-ax

I hear what you're saying now ax.

I believe that 49% number came from simply comparing the average earnings of men who are self-employed with the average earnings of women who are self-employed just as the feminists do with the wages of all men and all women who are employed by others. That makes it a useful stat to contrast with the feminist nonsense about wage discrimination. I can't find the original reference, but I'll keep looking.

Incidentally - I did a bit of research and couldn't come up with the source of that stat. However, I did discover an interesting fact on a NZ government website:

Women who are self-employed put in far fewer hours than self-employed men with the same qualifications and this accounts for the difference in their earnings.

In short, there is a DIRECT relationship between effort and reward, as the NZ Department of The Glaringly Obvious illustrated for us. If the average woman earns 77% of what the average man does, despite better access to education, training and other benefits, it's a safe conclusion that female employees are only 65-75% as productive as men. Hence the pay gap. Productivity + risk = rewards. Put in less effort or take less risks and you'll realize lower rewards, simple as that.

If there's conclusive evidence in a single workplace of men and women with identical qualifications earning different amounts of money for the same productivity at the same job then that needs to be addressed. That being said, "comparable worth" is complete bullshit. A stewardess shouldn't make as much as a pilot. A nurse shouldn't make as much as a surgeon. A secretary shouldn't make as much as a CEO.

Of course the media and our governments are only interested in addressing disparities if women make less, never if men make less or are expected to be more productive than women for the same money.

Wow, I'm shocked. I didn't think this would happen so outright. Just goes to show what kind of a cultural climate we're dealing with here. After all, it wasn't so long ago that a female soldier who fainted in Iraq got more coverage than the men who died to save her, or that time when a female soldier was given more importance than the 14 men who she was captured with in Iran.

http://petepatriarch.blogspot.com