Showing posts with label gender ideology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender ideology. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 30, 2025

The stalled progress of gender equality in the US labor market (Research Highlights Featured Chart by AEA). Really!

It is a disgrace for the American Economic Association to promote such demagoguery! See also my blog post here on this demagoguery of a gender pay gap.

What or how much does workforce participation have to do with this "gender equality"?

What is wrong with the chart below? 
  1. Data stops with the 1990s. Why not more recent data?
  2. Education, workforce participation and age do not determine wage outcomes as much as other factors! It is foremost the choice of jobs, changing jobs, relocating for jobs, prior job experiences, job promotions, career ambitions and so on!

The authors of this paper use again the old, false, and worn out trope of child rearing (why not elder care etc.)! Although, the US abandoned the draft in 1973, still predominantly men choose military service which may or may not negatively affect/impact their lifetime income as well.

The first author Richard Blundell is a highly recognized, older economist, if I am not mistaken. His accumulated lifetime citation count is 109,830, which is quite good! He started publishing research articles in the late 1970s.

"The gender wage gap narrowed dramatically from the mid-1970s through the mid-1990s, with women's wages converging toward those of men across all income levels. Then progress stalled, and despite continued advances in women's education and workforce participation over the subsequent quarter century, the gap has persisted. [???] ..."

From the abstract:
"We estimate the full distribution of life cycle wages for cohorts of men and women in the United States using a quantile selection model to account for systematic differences in employment by gender and education group. 
Although common within-group time effects [???] are shown to be a key driver of labor market inequalities across gender, important additional differences by birth cohort emerge with more recent cohorts of women delaying child rearing [???] and, by implication, the onset of child penalties in wages.
These cross-cohort differences help account for the stalling of progress in gender wage gaps over the past quarter century."

The stalled progress of gender equality in the US labor market

Labour market inequality and the changing life cycle profile of male and female wages (original news release from 4/13/2023 plus working paper)



Figure 5 from the authors’ paper shows their estimates broken down by educational attainment.


Tuesday, October 14, 2025

When women researchers publish, media attention doesn’t always follow. Really!

Another fine example of junk journalism produced by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)!

This seems to be a popular subject as there is another similar research paper published March 2024 (see below).

Since I study machine learning & AI research, I can say that of the 451 leading researchers that I follow only 14 or 3% are women and I give female researchers a preferential treatment. Just to give one example of the reality regarding a very hot research area.

"... But a new study finds that benefit goes disproportionately to men, potentially widening existing gender gaps and shaping public perceptions of who counts as a researcher. In an analysis of 1.2 million news stories about scholarly research, men-led papers were found to receive more attention overall and were heavily overrepresented in the top 5% of most covered studies. Women-led papers, on the other hand, clustered at the bottom. ..."

From the abstract:
"Media coverage shapes public perception of science, yet gender bias can compromise its objectivity. Based on 1 million papers with 1.2 million media citations, we examine how the corresponding author’s gender relates to media citing scientific research. We reveal that more women-led papers receive at least one media mention in women-underrepresented fields, but they are cited less frequently across all fields. Women authors are underrepresented in national outlets and are more often reported by liberal media. Sentiment analysis shows that men-led papers are more often associated with positive sentiment in news text, while women-led papers elicit more negative sentiment."

When women researchers publish, media attention doesn’t always follow | Science | AAAS "Men-led papers receive more media coverage than women’s, new study finds"



Tuesday, October 01, 2024

Two terrible euphemisms associated with gender ideology

Gender dysphoria: Does a phoria like euphoria justify the often irreversible medical treatment (more accurately termed medical malpractice)? This is a laughable term when it comes to an individual making possibly life altering decisions about her/his sex/gender.

Gender affirming treatment: Meaning often basically irreversible genital mutilation (e.g. double mastectomy or castration). Even the hormone therapy/blocker is not harmless! Doctors performing so called gender affirming care are more like  dangerous quacks and should be sued or loose their license!

Just these two euphemisms alone should make anyone aware of what kind of dangerous quackery and fad this gender ideology is!

Maybe in a very small minority of cases justify a gender change of a human being. In many other cases it is more like a temporary mania or frenzy.