Economist Thomas Sowell explains

This is a fantastic video – I didn’t realize the data was so consistent from that long ago. Economists have found the same results in much more recent studies, as well:

Unmarried, continuously working women earning more than the same kind of men. Right about up to the age of 35, when the data drops off and men start to make more. The general theory is that this is due to women giving birth and dropping out of the workforce.

I got a bachelors in economics and have spent many hours researching the labor statistics about the wage gap. Really a great video find, here.

Assuming a constant rate of dance steps and musicals performed per year, 7.5 jazz hands will devalue to approximately 6.67 in the first year, making it a constant devaluation of 0.83/year.

I have a guess: Those intolerant economics types definitely appreciate your Theatre degree. But the students and professors in the theatre department aren’t as tolerant of your economics knowledge.

We mainly read from Judith Butler’s philosophic writings on this theory (SHE DOES NOT MAKE READING EASY), and we read the play “M Butterfly” which is a queer adaptation of Madame Butterfly. Original cast had John Lithgow as a man with ambiguous sexual attractions.

There might be a circumstantial explanation for this too. Women experience the world differently to men. Warning: Massive generalizations ahead. Relative to men it’s not exactly like but somewhat resembles the way children experience the world. Specifically, they experience things as having been put there for them. Eg: if you ask small children why there are rivers, they’ll say “so that boats can float on them”.

That’s because, to them, things tend to have been made for them in some way or another. Men, by contrast, learn early in life that it’s up to them to perform and make things work. It’s not surprising therefore that they take greater interest in how things work. When you’re not under the pressure to perform, you have lost one major incentive to be interested in how things work.

Women of course go through that process as well. But because of gynocentrism/male disposability, men seem to be pushed further while women, even as adults, often enjoy a support network and a general societal attitude of care and empathy for their needs.

When the system works in your favor, you don’t need to know how it works nor would you likely care.

I’m actually surprised that the programming industry isn’t filled with women. I know plenty of smart women with ungodly organizational skills that document everything that happens in their lives. They would be absolutely amazing programmers but they have no interest at all even though the pay is substantial and companies bend over backwards to get female programmers. Instead they’re all struggling middle managers or work at The North Face. Somehow management is “in” for women these days, maybe because its seen as a sign of power or something.

his is a good question that economics may not have all the answers too. I would think there is a little bit of a catch 22 where women don’t join fields that are male dominated because they are male dominated.

There is also the notion that women enter fields focused on helping people (like nursing and social work) as opposed to more cutthroat industries like engineering or finance, because those things motivate them more than the potential money they could earn. This is also dangerous territory, but it is also possible that women are less concerned with careers that earn lots of money because they know they can get married to a man who is in a high paying career and just retire to have kids or have fun with their “Mrs” degree.

The Mystery of the Missing Million(2002)

The expectations on Japanese men is unreal. I worked for a very large Japanese manufacturing company at one of its USA locations. During plant start up, many of the Japanese engineers were on site to “help”. We got a glimpse of their world. If I were trapped in something like that, I’d definitely consider suicide. In Japan, engineers for this company must always have their desk/offices on the first floor. They’ve had such an issue with engineers snapping, running up to a higher floor or the roof, and jumping. If an engineer or technical person has to go to a higher floor (say, for a meeting), then they must be escorted by a manager.

They’re expected to get there super early and work until super late. They usually all go eat dinner and drink together in the evening and then go back to the office for a few hours. It’s considered rude and unprofessional to leave before your supervisor does. The thing is… they aren’t really any more productive than their American counterparts. They just spread out their work over a longer day. They might work for a few hours, shoot shit for a few hours, and repeat.

The difference is that they cant have a life outside of their career and meet career expectations. Suicide is a huge problem among Japanese technical professionals.

If you’re going to do this though you need to instill a sense of community and togetherness, or you’re just going to have people living in close proximity but who are really still estranged from one another.

I propose a badge of sorts that they can (must) affix to their shirt front or shirt sleeve, and when you see another of your concentration camp mates out you can tell them apart because they have their badge on their shirt. So you’d be out in a crowd but you could always feel like you had friends around so long as you saw some badges (which could be like stars I guess).

There’s probably plenty of workplaces near you that have implemented “anti-harassment” policies instead of actually doing anything to change the workplace culture. The place that I work (or at least the office staff at the place I work from) have started a trend of requesting standing desks because being sedentary is bad for your health, so let’s all be sedentary on our feet rather than being sedentary on our asses like we used to be (studies have shown that standing desks do little, it’s actually about how much physical activity you do.)

We know that marketing shit food to kids has an impact on childhood obesity and the incidence of “lifestyle diseases”. What do we do? Provide nutritional information so that overworked and absentee parents could figure out just how bad all those different breakfast cereals are for their kids if only they had the time and inclination (and the energy to deal with having yet-another tantrum before the kids are ready for school.)