Thank God For The Wage Gap Because Without It Women Would Never Find A Husband
Last week, Republicans in the Senate unanimously blocked a vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act. Any person with a brain finds it hard to concept why a woman wouldn’t earn equal pay for equal work, but here we are in 2014 and women are still getting 77 cents to a man’s dollar. Many conservatives argue this factoid, but studies show that although women are the breadwinners in four out of 10 families and earn more college degrees than men, when looking at the wages of full time workers they still make less than their male counterparts.
Enter Phyllis Schlafly, founder of “pro-family” organization Eagle Forum – to tell us all why it is imperative that women continue to be paid less for their work; they won’t be able to find a husband if they get equal pay. Makes sense, right? Of course it doesn’t, but I guess we don’t really look to the religious right for a whole lot of logic, now do we? I use them purely for entertainment – which is why I am passing this story on to you.
President Barack Obama and his feminist friends have been trotting out their tiresome slogan that women are paid only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. Every reputable scholar who has commented has proved that this is a notorious falsehood that anyone should be embarrassed to use.
I’m one of Obama’s feminist friends – hence why I used it.
While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.
Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate.
Yes, simple arithmetic proves that women would completely change their requirements for a mate if they made more money. Wait, what?
The best way to improve economic prospects for women is to improve job prospects for the men in their lives, even if that means increasing the so-called pay gap.
It makes a whole lot of sense to shift the conversation about what women are paid, to what the men in their lives are paid. Need I point out the obvious that there are plenty of women who have no men in their lives? How about the fact that dual income families account for 42% of households? But women should not worry about what they are paid, they should instead concentrate on making the pay gap even wider so their men are paid more to make up for what they aren’t earning because of the pay gap. Are you confused yet? You should be – because this woman makes no sense.
Equal pay for equal work – it’s not rocket science people. The only question is, why did every, single Republican vote against it?