Guess what? The scoff-mongers are right. When you look at the statistics within a job category, women make as much as or more than men, in some occupations. In two occupations, to be exact. The median weekly wage for female bartenders ($334) is 100 percent of the median wage for male bartenders. (Actually, the chart shows it as 100.1 percent, but due to rounding this isn't apparent in the median wage for each gender.) And women working in "miscellaneous food preparation occupations" make 101.3 percent of what men make in those occupations - $270 for women compared to $266 for men. That's it. In all other occupations where median wages are given for both men and women, women make less than men. In many cases, though, the gap is quite a bit smaller than the 75 percent quoted by wage-gap true believers, so that figure may be somewhat misleading as well. But a "wage gap" is undeniably present in most occupations.

However, in many cases a median wage is not calculated for one gender or the other. Some occupations are so dominated by one gender that there simply aren't enough workers of the other gender to calculate a median. For example, there aren't enough male librarians to calculate a median wage for male librarians, and there aren't enough female architects to calculate a median female wage for that occupation.

Could it be that there is no wage gap in those occupations? Apparently not, as a general rule. We know this because, even though the median for one of the genders is missing, a weekly median is given for all workers. In most of the cases where only the median for male earnings is given, the median for all workers is lower. That means that the "missing median" (female median wage) must be lower than the median for male earnings. In most of the cases where only the median for female workers is given, the median for all workers is higher, meaning that the missing median (male median wage) must be higher than the median for female workers.

If that sounds confusing, an example should make it clearer. For the "architects" job category, the median weekly wage for male workers is $983. The median wage for all workers is $918. If women were being paid the same as men, the median for "all workers" would be the same as the median for men. But again, in a few categories, as with the two categories mentioned above, the "median" for all workers is close enough to the median for the gender shown to indicate that there is not a large wage gap.

Although all the detail can be fascinating, I found the sheer volume of data in the charts to be overwhelming - a case of not being able to see the forest because of all the trees in the way. So I've created my own data charts, focusing primarily on the current median wage calculations, and limiting the chart to the larger sub-categories rather than each individual job. I also added some calculations of my own, showing what percentage of the workforce in a given sub-category is female. I found it interesting to note that it is quite common (although by no means universal) that, the higher the percentage of females in the job, the lower the median wage compared to other jobs within that sub-category.

In researching information on the wage gap, I also found that The Women's Bureau of the Department of Labor had produced a chart of the "20 Leading Occupations for Women in 1999" - the jobs in which the highest number of women are employed. I've reproduced that chart with some additional information as well, and also created my own chart of the jobs in which the highest number of men are employed. My big discovery in putting together these charts was that the top wage of the "women's work" fell somewhere in the middle of the range of wages for the "men's work," and the bottom wage of the "men's work" fell somewhere in the middle of the rage of wages for the "women's work." This is undoubtedly a large part of the reason for the overall wage gap of 75 percent. But, as with most of the claims on both sides, it's not the whole story.

I think the data makes it clear: The real myth is the claim that the wage gap is a myth. A wage gap between men and women clearly does exist. But the oft quoted 75 percent figure, while not a myth - the data does show that overall gap - is also misleading. It is not generally true of every job in every category. What is not clear from the data available is why the wage gap exists. Each "side" of the argument has part of the answer. And each side refuses to acknowledge the other side's "part" of the answer. But, take a look for yourself. The raw numbers should give both sides of the "argument" something to think about.

~Karen~

Back > The Rhetoric > Page 1, 2