In light of the dire and depressing news stories about a tanking world economy, I’m pleased to report a shining ray of sunshine: the Paycheck Fairness Act failed to pass the Senate on Tuesday, June 5. At last, something positive from our elected officials!
Now, of course this means feminists are frothing at the mouth, but that’s OK. That’s what feminists do: froth like rabid dogs. Nothing new there.
So what is the Paycheck Fairness Act? It is, allegedly, an “improvement” over the Equal Pay Act, which was signed into law in 1963. This (cough) new and improved act would have eliminated the caps on punitive and compensatory damages for alleged offenses that happened years, even decades, ago. Worse, it would make those damages available for even unintentional pay disparities. It doesn’t matter if the pay disparities were a result of cost-of-living adjustments for different parts of the country (New York City versus, say, Preston, Kan.). It would also make it easier for trial lawyers to file large class-action lawsuits, meaning lots of women could get together and whine collectively.
This legislation would also have tried to impose “comparable worth” guidelines, a built-in logistical nightmare. It means you have to compare one job with a completely different job to make sure women are paid comparably. How does a secretary compare to, say, a plumber? How does a teacher compare to a construction worker?
You see, ever since 1963 and the passage of the Equal Pay Act (which made it illegal to pay the genders differently for the same work, helloooo?), feminists have been nagging and throwing around studies about how poor helpless women “still” make only 77 cents for every dollar men make.
Acting on the mantra that all women must think and act alike in order to qualify as women, feminists tried to convince the American public that we poor little cupcakes were downtrodden by evil men. Of course liberal studies will show women earn less than men. The books are cooked. What – do you think feminists will do all this research with all their feminist grant money only to find a statistically insignificant pay inequality? C’mon, get real.
Putting aside the fact that any business worth its druthers would line up to hire women if it would cut their payroll by 23 percent, I should point out that this alleged wage discrepancy is a myth aggressively pushed by feminists.
The fact is, women make choices that allow them to juggle family obligations since (I know this is shocking) someone must take care of the kids. “Disparities in wages largely exist between women with children, and men and single women,” notes Kate O’Beirne in her phenomenal book “Women Who Make the World Worse.” “This is not sex discrimination, but rather the choices mothers freely make in their desire to balance work and family responsibilities.”
In short, it’s not men holding women back; it’s children. When a woman becomes a mother, her priorities quite rightfully shift toward the care of her family, thus sabotaging her earning potential. But that’s OK with mothers. They know where their priorities are. (Hint: it’s NOT in the office.)
Feminists hate this. They feeeeeeeeel (since most feminist claptrap is based on feelings rather than fact) that women shouldn’t have to alter their career life one iota after giving birth to another human being. To them, “women are only fulfilled if their salaries are equal to men’s and that a preference for more time at home is somehow flawed,” notes O’Beirne. For feminists, money is always the answer.
And since these women are chronically offended, they are willing and eager to dig up decades-old dirt on deceased employers in an effort to advance their agenda (and get some money). They peddle victimhood and demand equal outcomes regardless of women’s individual choices and priorities.
What feminists don’t want to admit is that men work harder, for longer hours and take less time off for family matters. Women are eight times as likely as men to spend four or more years out of the workforce, and nearly nine times as likely to leave work for six months or longer for family reasons. Sorry, ladies, that’s just the way of the world. The biological programming of women is to care for their children. You can’t expect a boss to pay you for that.
And men, let us not forget, are the ones taking the dirty, nasty, dangerous jobs women won’t touch, even if the pay is higher. Men don’t do this because they like dirty, nasty, dangerous jobs. They do this because their biological programming is to provide for their families. Working women, by contrast, are usually in air-conditioned carpeted environments that are unlikely to injure or kill them. But men are the ones who are logging, fishing, working in mines, or building high-rises. It’s no wonder that 92 percent of all job-related deaths happen to men.
Yet women want “comparable worth.” Go figure.
C’mon, admit it – no one gives a rip about perceived discrepancies in paychecks stemming from 15 years ago. Instead, this legislation would have been little more than an opportunity for feminists to vent their collective spleen on men, whom they apparently loathe more than any other group on the planet (except conservative women, of course). The Paycheck Fairness Act comes down to nothing more than a legal excuse for shrill vindictive women to charge their male bosses with punitive suits because they worked 77/100ths as hard as men but want to be paid 100 percent.
Women already DO have the freedom to pursue every opportunity as men do – and studies have shown their pay is 95 percent of men’s when they perform the same as men. But most women (especially if they have children) lack the commitment and drive of top-ranking men. Just as important, most women are unwilling to take on the physically dangerous (but better paying) jobs that routinely get men killed in the line of duty.
The Paycheck Fairness Act would have been nothing more than multiple lawsuits waiting to happen, lawsuits that very well could have put businesses out of business, increasing unemployment for men AND women. With a fragile and tanking economy, the last thing we need is a bunch of silly spiteful women filing frivolous lawsuits over perceived issues decades in the past.
Grow up, feminists. Start contributing to the economy, not wrecking it.