Women Struggle For Parity Of The Heart: Fill & Download for Free

There are many studies out there that prove the wage gap exists even after accounting for control variables, like maternity leave.Before I answer your question, I’d like to straighten out your botched understanding of the topics in your question, especially since you aren’t operating in good faith and your narrative appears to be nefarious in its intent.These are some of the invalidating arguments people tend make about the gender wage gap:“Men are more ambitious/Men work harder”: [1] [2]The workforce participation rate between women and men is at ~14%75% of single mothers are sole breadwinnersWomen are working outside the home in the largest rates ever, but also are more likely to be in charge of:childrendomestic houseworktaking care of other family membersvolunteer more on average then men2. “Women take more time off work/maternal leave”:An ICEDR global study found that: [3]Company bosses/CEOs/managers believe that women will leave their jobs at 30Women are not seen as good longterm investments because people assume that all women want to have babies and/or want to be stay at home moms [4]Ironically, women are more likely to leave a job because they found one that pays betterWomen who do leave their jobs to have children pay a 4% wage penalty per child [5]PayScale recently collected data from over 1.4 million workers - the data showed: [5]the wage gap in median earnings for women with children is 31%Married men with children get the highest pay among male earners ($67,900) - men typically experience an increase in pay after becoming fathers3. “Women should develop better negotiating skills”:“Just ask for a raise” [6]Women worry that pushing for more money will damage their image. Research shows they're right to be concerned: Both male and female managers are less likely to want to work with women who negotiate during a job interview.Women are seen as bossy, ungrateful and pushy when they ask for a raise and are 4x more likely to experience enduring negative views by their boss then men are after asking [7] [8]4. “Men just have more experience/education”:Women are currently graduating from college at higher rates then men are [9]Women are also going to graduate school at higher rates than men.Regardless, Georgetown's Center on Education and the Workforce found that men who had completed a little college but lacked a degree earn the same as women with a B.A. [9]In order for women to make as much as men with a B.A., women need to have a Ph. D.Women that spend longer amounts of time in the workforce experience the biggest gaps in pay to peers that are men [10]Women in their late 20s: earn ~92% of what their male peers receiveWomen in their early 50s: earn ~71% of a man's wages in the same fieldThe more women progress in their careers, the larger the pay gapThe biggest pay gap is at the executive level5. “Men go after the higher paying jobs”:True, but this is because men tend to be favored and they already dominate careers that pay the mostCareers that tend to be dominated by women (nursing, social work and teaching) are less compensated than the careers men dominateThis doesn’t reflect skill - it reflects gendered preconceptions, or in other words, society’s understanding of what work is valuableWhat is seen as feminine is undervalued, what is seen as masculine is overvalued.Regardless, physicians that are woman and that work the same amount of time in the same field make ~24% less than than their peers that are men in that field [11] [12]Edit: after reading a comment regarding this section of my answer, I thought I should explore this topic more thoroughly:One of the biggest studies done on variables found in the gender wage gap regarding job type and gender, Occupational Feminization and Pay: Assessing Causal Dynamics Using 1950–2000 U.S. Census Data [13], further backs up the trend that when more women move into a specific job sector that men traditionally/currently dominate(d), the wage decreases.This study’s controlled variables included:Level of educationWork experienceWork skillsRaceLocationDemand of jobThe overwhelming evidence shows that the work women do is placed at a lower value across the board.In an interview with The New York Times, England, the co author of this study, said:It’s not that women are always picking lesser things in terms of skill and importance. It’s just that the employers are deciding to pay it less.The New York Times explores the findings from Occupational Feminization and Pay: Assessing Causal Dynamics Using 1950–2000 U.S. Census Data by looking into specific careers: [14]Examples of jobs that show a decrease in wage when women start to enter a field at higher rates then men:…In the field of recreation — working in parks or leading camps — which went from predominantly male to female from 1950 to 2000:Median hourly wages in this field declined 57%, accounting for the change in the value of the dollar, according to a complex formula used by Professor Levanon.The job of ticket agent also went from mainly male to female during this period:Wages dropped 43%The same thing happened when women in large numbers became designers:Wages fell 34%Housekeepers:Wages fell 21%Biologists:Wages fell 18%The reverse was true when a job attracted more men.The New York Times continues on, saying the following points may influence the gender wage gap:Today, differences in the type of work men and women do account for 51% of the pay gapLarger portion than in 1980, according to definitive new research by Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, economists at Cornell.Women have moved into historically male jobs much more in white-collar fields than in blue-collar ones.Yet the gender pay gap is largest in higher-paying white-collar jobs, Ms. Blau and Mr. Kahn found…Of the 30 highest-paying jobs, including:chief executivearchitectcomputer engineer,26 are male-dominated, according to Labor Department data analyzed by Emily Liner, the author of the Third Way report.Of the 30 lowest-paying ones, including food server, housekeeper and child-care worker, 23 are female dominated.Many differences that contributed to the pay gap have diminished or disappeared since the 1980s:Women over all now obtain more education than men and have almost as much work experience.Women moved from clerical to managerial jobs and became slightly more likely than men to be union members.Both of these changes helped improve wage parity, Ms. Blau’s and Mr. Kahn’s research said.Yes, women sometimes voluntarily choose lower-paying occupations because they are drawn to work that happens to pay less, like caregiving or nonprofit jobs, or because they want less demanding jobs because they have more family responsibilities outside of work.…many social scientists say there are other factors, like:gender biassocial pressure, that bring down wages for women’s work.Other research, has found that any occupation that involves caregiving, like nursing or preschool teaching, pays less, even after controlling for the disproportionate share of female workers.After sifting through the data, Ms. Blau and Mr. Kahn concluded that pure discrimination may account for 38% of the gender pay gap.Discrimination could also indirectly cause an even larger portion of the pay gapFor instance, by discouraging women from pursuing high-paying, male-dominated careers in the first place.“Some of it undoubtedly does represent the preferences of women, either for particular job types or some flexibility, but there could be barriers to entry for women and these could be very subtle,” Ms. Blau said. “It could be because the very culture and male dominance of the occupation acts as a deterrent.”For example, social factors may be inducing more women than men to choose lower-paying but geographically flexible jobs, she and Mr. Kahn found.Even though dual-career marriages are now the norm, couples are more likely to choose their location based on the man’s job, since men earn more.This factor is both a response to and a cause of the gender pay gap.The New York Times article concludes with the following:Men and women are paid differently not just when they do different jobs but also when they do the same work.Research by Claudia Goldin, a Harvard economist, has found that a pay gap persists within occupations.Female physicians:earn 71% of what male physicians earnlawyers earn 82%It happens across professions:This month, the union that represents Dow Jones journalists announced that its female members working full time at Dow Jones publications made 87 cents for every dollar earned by their full-time male colleagues.Ms. Liner of Third Way said…give priority to people’s talents and interests when choosing careers, even if it means going outside gender norms…for instance encouraging girls to be engineers and boys to be teachers.An example of men getting paid more when they have jobs that are traditionally linked to women would be chefs.Stacy J. Williams, who has a Ph. D. in sociology, explains why women are constantly put at a disadvantage in the job market: [15]Since women spend more than twice as much time in home kitchens than men do, it seems strange that there are so few women in professional kitchens. Many social forces, ranging from the organization of professional kitchens to cultural ideas about women and cooking, can help explain the phenomenon.Mary Blair-Loy has written that there is a cultural “family devotion schema,” or a widespread cultural belief that women’s primary commitments should be to home and family.These expectations do not apply to men; instead, men are expected to have women partners who complete this care work.These cultural beliefs, combined with the historical definition of feeding the family as women’s work, contribute to the continued tendency for women to cook more often in the home.Many professional kitchens also have a culture of masculinity that is not welcoming to women. In 2011, 37% of the sexual discrimination cases that were reported to the federal government involved restaurants…Further, these men are concerned that women can’t “pull their weight” in a fast-paced kitchen environment that is built on teamwork and camaraderie. To prove that they are a useful part of the team, women often have to go above and beyond the required work and take on extra shifts. These behaviors and attitudes among the mostly male cooks and chefs make many women feel uncomfortable and unwelcome, turning the professional kitchen into a workplace where women feel they do not fit.The cultural understandings of women and food, combined with a workplace structure that is inhospitable to women and employees with family responsibilities, present significant obstacles to women chefs. Even though women are considered the authorities of home kitchens, they have a more difficult time gaining equal footing with men in restaurant kitchens. Despite these obstacles, there are women who defy these cultural expectations and compete in the restaurant world. Yet when these women aren’t portrayed as mothers or sex objects, they receive media attention for being outliers in a male-dominated occupation.NPR further explores this phenomenon: [16]Women have historically been told their place is in the kitchen — but not as chefs: According to statistics from the U.S. Labor Department, to this day, only about 20 percent of chefs are women.It all harks back to the fact that being a chef was not as glamorous as it is today, says Deborah Harris, a sociology professor at Texas State University…It might come as a surprise to some that back in the day, in 18th and 19th century France, being a chef was the opposite of being a celebrity."It was a really low-status career," says Harris. In response, she says, male chefs made a big deal about "differentiating between the cultural, high-status, intellectual cooking of men, and the low-status, every day work of women."The Austin Chronicle pointed out the prevailing glass ceiling women experience in an industry they used to dominate: [17]A full 45% of people working in the culinary industry are women, yet women hold less than 10% of the top positions…Most successful chefs are fairly compulsive about their work, women no less than men. And it definitely takes that sort of compulsive dedication to advance through the ranks…But is it really harder for a woman than it is for man?Only in the past two decades has cooking become a glamorous profession…The image of the chef has changed radically in the past decade, though, and there is a certain romantic allure to the field. Today's chefs are educated -- many hold graduate degrees from Ivy League universities. They appear on television, travel all over the world, and lecture on topics relating to food, social science, history, and literature.More evidence of discrimination in the food industry: [18]A new study from pay transparency web site Glassdoor finds female chefs make 28.3 percent less in base pay than their male colleagues. That's the second-highest "adjusted" percentage among the careers included in the study.Glassdoor analyzed more than 505,000 salaries shared by full-time U.S. employees to come up with its findings. The research determined 33 percent of the gap in pay between men and women in the United States is linked to "possible workplace gender bias."Not only are women making less in the kitchen, they seem to be far less likely to earn prestigious accolades for their work. Out of the 211 semifinalists for the James Beard Foundation's regional Best Chef awards in 2016, 30 were women — that's a paltry 14 percent. In the Midwest, all 22 semifinalists were men. The recognition disparity is nothing new. In 2013, Time magazine published a "Gods of Food" issue that was so male dominated, it became known as "Dudes of Food."Dr. Andrew Chamberlain, who wrote the study for Glassdoor, says "occupation and industry sorting of men and women into jobs that pay differently" is the main cause for the gender pay gap across all professions in the United States. That doesn't necessarily explain the pay gap in kitchens because "chef" can be a vague term…The New York Times calls out the sexism seen in the restaurant industry: [19]For decades, chefs of both sexes believed that inequality was inevitable. The same stereotypes used to keep women out of armed combat, off the judicial bench and out of medical school were invoked to explain why women didn’t stick it out in the kitchen. The work, it was said, is too physically demanding and psychologically grueling; the hours were too incompatible with family life…One big question — why even women who make it to the top rank of chefs struggle for recognition — has often been posed, and never fully answered…“We are the quiet power behind the throne,” Ms. Chan said. “But sometimes everyone gets tired of being quiet.”6. “Who Cares?”:With controlled variables (career level, skills, etc.) the gender wage gap is ~8–5% [20]This means that college-educated women who work full time will earn ~$500,000 less than their male peers do over their lifetime [21]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Now I’ll move on to answering your question about the “spending gap”.In general, it is more expensive to be a woman because of unfair androcentric marketing/retail/economic concepts.So, not only do women get paid less than men on average, even when they have the same job/education level/time working/experience/skill, etc., they also have to pay more for basic items then men pay.French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir eloquently said:If the man’s the norm and the woman "different," then men’s products too are considered the "normal version." Women’s products are therefore considered to be more special, luxurious versions, and are consequently more expensive.6 basic examples of women “spending more”: [22]Mortgages:A 2011 study published in the Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics found that women, on average, pay more for mortgages than men, with the mean mortgage interest rates for women coming in 0.4% higher than for men.“The disparity cannot be fully explained by traditional variables such as mortgage features, borrower characteristics, and market conditions,” the authors write.In other words, women with credit scores and other qualifying factors similar to men pay more for their mortgages.For a 30-year mortgage, that could mean a man pays $26,000 less in interest over the life of the loan than a woman (assuming he gets a 5% mortgage rate while she gets a 5.4% rate).2. Dry Cleaning:Not all items are more expensive for women to get dry-cleaned — suits, blazers and slacks tend to have similar prices — but shirts are, according to the study published in the journal Gender Issues in 2011.The average price to clean a men’s shirt was $2.06, while it was $3.95 for a woman’s shirt — and that’s before considering the added cost of shirts made from special fabric like silk or rayon, or with embellishments like sequins or pleats.“The observed pricing disparity is for identical shirts except that one is labeled a ‘men’s’ shirt while the other is a ‘women’s’ shirt,” the authors write.This means that if a man and woman got one shirt dry cleaned per month for 10 years, on average, it would cost a man $247.20 in today’s dollars, while a woman would end up paying $474.3. Haircuts & hair care products:As almost every woman knows, getting a haircut costs far more for women than for men.A study by economist Liston-Heyes found that even for the same haircut, women paid more than men.“We started calling different hairdressers and explicitly said we had the same haircut [as a man],” she says.Still, she says, in almost every case, the price for the woman’s cut was more than a price for a man’s cut.A 1996 study done in New York City had similar findings: Nearly half of hair salons charged women more for a simple haircut. (New York City now prohibits gender-based pricing, though the practice persists.)Liston-Heyes says that this may be because, on average, it takes more time and effort for salons to cut women’s hair than men’s hair, so when they create their pricing structure, they make women’s cuts more expensive.What’s more, the 2015 study by the NYC Department of Consumer Affairs found that the largest price discrepancy between men’s and women’s products existed for shampoo and conditioner (women, on average, paid 48% more for a similar product)4. Deodorant and other personal care products:Stopping odor is a pricier proposition for women than for men, according to a 2011 study published in the journal Gender Issues.While on the surface, prices for a stick of deodorant for men and women seem the same (roughly $3.15 per stick), men’s deodorant sticks tend to be larger than women’s (2.86 ounces vs. 2.29 ounces).This means that, on average, women pay $1.44 per ounce of deodorant, compared with $1.15 for men — a difference of about 20%.Among the other pricier products for women:Razor cartridges and razors cost more for women than men by an average of 11%, according to the NYC study of similar women’s and men’s productsBody wash costs 6% more.“Of all the industries analyzed, personal care had the highest premium for women, with products costing, on average, 13% more than personal care products for men,” the study concluded.“Women’s and men’s deodorant are the same,” says New York City-based dermatologist Dennis Gross.“If you check the label there are the same active ingredients at the same percentage based on FDA regulations.”5. Cars:A 2001 study published in The American Economic Review found that car dealers made better initial offers to white men than to white women (more than $200 lower) and black women (more than $400 lower).What’s more, the final markup was about 50% higher for white women than for white menMore than 100% higher for black women.“Without any negotiating at all, two out of five white males obtained a better offer than their counterparts achieved after bargaining on average for more than forty minutes,” the authors write.6. Clothing:Adult women, on average, pay 8% more for their clothes than men do.The largest price discrepancies were in shirts (15%), dress shirts (13%) and jeans (10%).The Pink Tax: [23]Whether it's razors, dry cleaning or toys, women still pay more for those gender-specific items than men, studies show…"Price discrimination adds another layer to the wage inequality women face, making it harder sometimes for women to make ends meet," said Surina Khan, CEO of the Women’s Foundation of California, a group devoted to advancement of gender equality.The Bureau of Labor Statistics said that in the decade between 2004 and 2014, women earned 80% to 83% as much as men.The Pink Tax, so named because of the color of products directly marketed to girls & women, is the price difference for female centered products compared with gender neutral goods or those marketed to men. And even though the issue has been around for decades, it is still profound.In late 2015, the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs published a study comparing nearly 800 products from more than 90 brands, looking for price differences in items marketed to different genders.On average, products for women or girls cost 7% more than comparable products for men and boys.For example:Apparel:Girls' clothing cost 4% more than boys, and women's clothing cost 8% more than men’s.Toys:Girls' toys and accessories cost an average of 7% more than boys' toys.Separately, a side-by-side comparison of two Radio Flyer My 1st Scooters showed this: A red scooter cost $24.99 and a pink scooter cost $49, despite them being identical in all other ways.Personal care:Women's personal care products also cost 13% more than men’s, according to the department's study.Normally, consumers look to supply and demand to remedy inequities. If prices get to high on a product or service, someone finds out how to provide it cheaper.But “not all markets are perfect,” said Michael Cone, a customs attorney who filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade in 2007 that raised the broader question of whether different tariff rates for men’s and women’s apparel violate constitutional equal protection provisions.The case was dismissed, but discussion around the issue goes on.Here is a basic visual of the pink tax:Edit #2: another commenter suggested they’d be interested in how auto repairs costs differ for women, so I looked into that as well and found further evidence of gender discrimination in pricing.According to a 2013 paper from the Kellogg School of Management, this is definitely another area that the pink tax affects: [24]For male callers, there is no difference between having “no idea” about an expected price and being a savvy consumer: either way, you are quoted something right around market price. But for female callers, says Zettelmeyer, “you’re much worse off saying you know nothing as opposed to quoting the price of $365."Below is an exert from a Washington Post article [25] regarding a study done by RepairPal[26] :77 percent of respondents said mechanics are more likely to sell women unnecessary repairs, and 66 percent believed that mechanics charge women more than men for the same services.Health insurance has consistently been more expensive for women. The fact that some women give birth does not justify the discrepancies: [27]…if we ignore all costs directly associated with pregnancy and childbearing (the logic here being that it takes two parties to create a child and both parties should be willing to pay equally to support that endeavor), men aren't actually any cheaper to insure than women."When you get older, men cost more to insure than women," explained Jonathan Gruber, a health economist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Later in life, men are more likely to have a variety of conditions including heart attacks, lung cancer, and liver cancer. They're also more likely to smoke, drink, and get in accidents, according to experts.Larry Levitt, a senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, said that while Kaiser doesn't have any independent analysis of this, insurers have historically charged younger women more than men in the individual market, even though those plans rarely covered maternity services. "That tends to reverse at older ages, when men have generally been charged more than women," he said. "It's reasonable to assume that insurers set those premiums based on the patterns of health care use that they saw."In 2008 the average expenditure per person with an expense, including expenses covered by insurance and those paid out-of-pocket, was slightly higher for women ($5,635) than for men ($4,952), according to data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. But the difference in expenditures is largely attributable to childbirth.…men's average expenditures significantly exceeded women's for hospital inpatient services ($18,984 versus $12,997, respectively).The New York Times investigated some of the themes in charging women more for health insurance after the ACA had passed (which was an attempt to end gender discrimination in pricing): [28]Women still pay more than men for the same health insurance coverage, according to new research and data from online brokers.The new health care law will prohibit such “gender rating,” starting in 2014. But gaps persist in most states, with no evidence that insurers have taken steps to reduce them.For a popular Blue Cross Blue Shield plan in Chicago, a 30-year-old woman pays $375 a month, which is 31 percent more than what a man of the same age pays for the same coverage, according to eHealthInsurance.com, a leading online source of health insurance.In a report to be issued this week, the National Women’s Law Center, a research and advocacy group, says that in states that have not banned gender rating, more than 90 percent of the best-selling health plans charge women more than men…Differences in rates for men and women are not explained by the cost of maternity care. In the individual insurance market, such care is usually not part of the standard package of benefits. Maternity coverage may be offered as an optional benefit, or rider, for a hefty additional premium.In Louisville, Ky., according to eHealthInsurance.com, a 40-year-old nonsmoking woman pays $196 a month for a HumanaOne policy. That is 53 percent more than the $128 premium paid for the same coverage by a nonsmoking man of the same age.In addition, the nonsmoking woman pays 14 percent more than the $172 premium charged to a man of the same age who has used tobacco in the past year.In an article from Public Policy, there is more evidence that the amount women pay for health insurance is not justified by pregnancies: [29]...ratings say that the different rates for men and women are justified because women and men use different amounts of healthcare. They also often point to childbirth and maternal care as reasons why men and women’s healthcare may differ in cost.The first part of this argument, that men and women use different amounts of healthcare and women are thus more expensive to insure, is false. The fact is, if you remove maternity services, women are not more expensive to insure than men are—they simply use healthcare differently. Women cost the healthcare system more when they are younger, since they use preventative healthcare more than men do.Men cost the healthcare system more when they are older, since they are more likely to have heart attacks, lung cancer, and liver cancer. Also, men are more likely to smoke, drink, and get in accidents. It is unjust to penalize women when in fact both men and women cost the health system relatively equal amounts, just at different points in their life.Additionally, we should not punish women for their cautiousness while rewarding men for their recklessness. The argument that women are charged more because they use healthcare more is also incorrect because the parts of healthcare that women and men use at the same rate, such as specialty clinics and the emergency room, charge women more.The second tenet of this argument is also untrue; women cannot be “more costly to insure” due to coverage of the maternal and child health services, since very few of the plans that gender rate cover maternity services.According to a 2012 report from the National Women’s Law Center, before the implementation of the gender rating ban and inclusion of maternity services on insurance:92% of best-selling insurance plans engaged in gender rating.Of those plans, only 3% covered maternity services.Regardless of the verity of this argument, however, this should never be a reason that women have to pay more for healthcare. Men and women play equal roles in the conception of a child—they should both have to pay for childbirth.Aside from financial facts behind gender rating, it is clear that unequal rates are unethical. The $1 billion that gender rating costs women is especially impactful because women tend to have a lower income, often due to the wage gap. Before the passage of the ACA, 52% of women reported delaying medical care because of cost, and 32% of women reported giving up basic necessities in order to pay for healthcare expenses.The BBC pointed out that women are also more likely to be overcharged in ride share companies. POC experience more cancelations and longer wait times: [30]Ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft may discriminate against black people and women, a study from three US universities suggests.Black riders faced longer wait times and more frequent cancellations than white riders, the research indicates.Women were more likely to be overcharged or taken on elongated routes, it says.Researchers took nearly 1,500 rides in Seattle and Boston, gathering data from three taxi-hailing companies.The sexist stereotype that you (the person who asked this question) are trying to push - that women love to shop and buy things more then men - doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.Spending trends/habits: [31]“We found that men and women impulse shop about the same amount, but the way they feel and how much they spend when they do it are different,” said Credit Cards - Compare Credit Card Offers at CreditCards.com senior analyst Matt Schulz.Men were significantly more likely than women to spend serious money on that unplanned purchase.While just 7% of the women said they had spent $500 or more, 21% of the men did.Men also made more impulse purchases of $1,000 or more.Women tend to keep their impulse purchases small, under $25.Men are more than twice as likely to make an impulse purchase when they’re intoxicated.Women are twice as likely to buy impulsively when they are sad.Women are more likely to regret making an impulse purchase:52% of the women vs. 46% of the men said they experienced buyer’s remorse at one time or another.Women tend to be “in charge” of purchasing what everyone else needs (traditional gender roles): [32]In virtually every society in the world, women have primary care-giving responsibilities for both children and the elderly…In this primary caregiving role, women find themselves buying on behalf of everyone else in their lives.The list is long: in addition to buying for themselves, women buy on behalf of husbands, partners, kids, colleagues, adult children, friends, relatives, elderly parents, in-laws, their businesses and even their kids’ friends, to name just a few. If somebody, somewhere needs a gift, chances are there's a woman thinking about it; tracking it down; wrapping it; making sure it’s accompanied by a personal message and then arriving to the person on the appointed day.I sometimes think entire industries would collapse overnight if women stopped being so thoughtful. Consider the impact to the greeting card industry alone.There are a lot more variables that need to be considered; neither the gender wage gap or the “spending gap” (which is a red herring and is being used by you to obscure a real issue) is something that one basic pie chart can explain or that your uninformed opinion disproves or proves - I would encourage you to educate yourself instead of using Quora as a way to trivialize real issues by regurgitating talking points that originate in hostility.What is your goal here in denying real problems besides reinforcing the status quo, which further disadvantages women?Footnotes[1] Why Parental Leave Policies Are Changing[2] What Women Breadwinners Want[3] https://www.icedr.org/research/documents/15_millennial_women.pdf[4] A Dollar Short: What’s Holding Women Back from Equal Pay?[5] http://content.thirdway.org/publications/853/NEXT_-_Fatherhood_Motherhood.pdf[6] Why Women Don't Ask For More Money[7] Negotiation and the Gender Divide[8] Why Women Don’t Negotiate Their Job Offers[9] https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/10/31/women-more-likely-to-graduate-college-but-still-earn-less-than-men[10] Gender Pay Gap Ratios, Stats and Infographics | PayScale[11] https://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-women-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf[12] Here's How Much Doctors Actually Make in 2016[13] Occupational Feminization and Pay: Assessing Causal Dynamics Using 1950–2000 U.S. Census Data | Social Forces | Oxford Academic[14] As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops[15] Gender in Home Kitchens and Restaurants[16] Taking The Heat: Is Foodie Culture Making Room For Female Chefs?[17] The Whole Woman[18] Why Are Female Chefs Paid so Much Less Than Their Male Colleagues?[19] A Change in the Kitchen[20] Gender Pay Gap Ratios, Stats and Infographics | PayScale[21] collegepayoff-complete.pdf - Box[22] 6 times it’s more expensive to be a woman[23] 'Pink Tax' forces women to pay more than men[24] The Importance of Appearing Savvy[25] The auto-repair industry discriminates against women. So I quit my engineering job to become a mechanic.[26] https://repairpal.com/consumer-survey-march-2013[27] Why Making Women Pay More Than Men for Health Insurance Doesn't Make Sense[28] https://mobile.nytimes.com/redirect?to-mobile=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2012%2F03%2F19%2Fhealth%2Fpolicy%2Fwomen-still-pay-more-for-health-insurance-data-shows.html%3Freferer%3D[29] The End of Gender Rating: Women’s Insurance Under the ACA[30] Uber 'race and sex discrimination'[31] Guess which gender spends more on impulse[32] The Real Reason Women Shop More Than Men

It is surprising that Poland won the 1919-1920 war against the same revolutionary army which was winning the Civil War against White Russians and the Allied expeditionary forces.The numbers were not a decisive factor. My explanation of the Polish success:Motivation, Dedication, Military Intelligence and a bit of luck prevailed over Military Might.Numbers.The Red Army:Although by 1919 the red army totalled over 5 million, with additional recruits to draw from, in 1920 much of that force was still engaged in the civil war on several different fronts. Not all of the soldiers could be properly classified as fighting men. Many were former tsarist army soldiers, even more of them were conscripted peasants with not much military training and not much will to fight.In the course of 1920, almost 800,000 Red Army personnel were readily available to fight in the Polish war. 400 thousand were sent to the front.Polish forces: The Polish Army was made up of soldiers who had formerly served in the three partitioning empires, supported by large numbers of volunteers, plus two allied divisions of Ukrainians under Symon Petliura. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Warsaw_(1920)The combined Polish forces grew rapidly from 80,000 in 1918 to 737,767 by the 20th of August 1920. 348 thousand were sent to the front, so there was rough numerical parity between the Polish army and the red army.The main difference was that the Red Army had a seemingly limitless supply of massive reinforcements.Equipment. Both countries had been ravaged by World War 1.The Red Army had at its disposal much of the military equipment left by German armies after WW1, and modern Allied armaments (including armoured cars, armoured trains, trucks and artillery) captured from the White Russians and from the Allied expeditionary forces after their defeat.Polish forces:As Poland was only reestablished in November 1918, after over a hundred years of statelessness, there had been no chance of developing Polish military infrastructure under partitions or when the area became the battleground of WW1.Poland had whatever equipment was left over on her territory from the world war and whatever could be quickly procured. The Polish Army used guns made in five countries and rifles manufactured in six, each using different ammunition...It resulted in complications and extra shortages.In the summer of 1920 there were barely any weapons for the regular Polish Army units. Many regiments received reinforcements armed with war scythes, similar to the ones used in the 1863 uprising and in Napoleonic times. Volunteers in Warsaw in August 1920:During the Bolshevik war the only modern Polish Air Force’s plane, Sopwith Camel, was a private plane brought over by Kenneth Malcolm Murray, a New Yorker, one of a group of Americans who had volunteered to fight on the Polish side.https://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/12962-7eskadra-mysliwska-kosciuszko-porkmurray-1920/Motivation.Red Army going to war:Polish soldiers:I see heavy hearts vs defiant spirit.The Russian revolution was successful partly because of the agitation of anarchists and Bolsheviks against the fighting in WW1. They persuaded the people of Russia that hunger, and millions of dead and wounded were the consequence of 'stupidity or treason' of the self serving elites.With a 'Decree on Peace' (26 October 1917) the Bolsheviks promised to change it all and to deliver 'Peace, Bread and Land'. Instead, in June 1918 they brought in War Communism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_communism, which meant:requisition of agricultural surplus, rationing of food and most commodities, taking away and nationalisation of land, and several other restrictions.In effect: the people got no bread, no land and now they were being told to go to war again!The reason they were given for the war was to export the revolution to Western Europe, and to create a movement that would transform the world.Not exactly an inspiring sentiment for the war-weary, hungry masses in Russia.Trotsky, who was the mastermind of the European Revolution project, was underestimating just how much Polish people didn’t want to be transformed.They wanted to get back to some sort of normality after generations of struggle.Polish people were aware of the realities of communism next door and they didn’t want it in their own country.“The Russo-Polish war was the one serious attempt made by Moscow to carry Bolshevism into Western Europe on the points of bayonets.” Wrote in his memoirs Walter Krivitsky, Stalin’s dissident agent.For Poland the fight was for the survival of the newly reestablished Polish state in the face of the threat of communism.Dedication.Dedication on the Soviet side was mainly among those eager for power, who were fighting to get their turn in the circulation of elites .Trotsky on a customised train previously used by a tsarist minister:Trotsky tirelessly toured around the country in an armoured train, drumming up support with righteous rhetoric, handouts of food, alcohol and tobacco; printing propaganda material, animating spirits with a travelling brass band. Persuading the masses that they need to “Be on guard” (against the evil elites in Europe):Since he needed experience and expertise of military specialists immediately, Trotsky conscripted thousands of ex-officers and former non-commissioned officers from the now defunct Imperial Army. The tsarist officers probably suspected that they would be dispensed with once they were no longer needed.Trotsky was aware that he couldn’t rely on their loyal support.He also realised that conscripted peasants might be “politically unreliable”.In August 1918, Trotsky authorised the army commander General Mikhail Tukhachevsky, to place blocking units behind Red Army units, ordering them to shoot anyone who retreated without permission.Trotsky managed to co-opt the former tsarist commander Semyon Budyonny, with his fearsome Konarmia cavalry numbering initially 18 thousand men, built up with Stalin’s support to 4 cavalry divisions, 1 infantry brigade, 5 armored trains, a squadron of 15 planes, 350 machine guns and 350 cannons.After a while even these war seasoned fighters were getting weary of the Poles and Poland.They had been enticed into the war with promises of bourgeois luxuries and easily obtainable victories.“Hurry to thrash Polish bourgeois masters, and don’t forget baron Wrangel”“Save the downtrodden peasants from their rich Polish masters (and women will welcome you with flowers)” :Instead, after many years of invasions, Poland’s towns and cities were mostly wrecks and the damn Poles kept fighting back.The blacksmith, the peasant and an old reservist ganging up against the “bringers of classless society and eternal justice”.“Protect your family from the Bolshevik enemy”:At some stage a brigade of Budyonny’s Cossacks switched sides, shot their commissars, and began attacking the Reds. After deserting Konarmia they formed a unit in the Polish Army.In other words, in the uncertain situation under communist rule loyalties were fickle.Dedication in Poland:With the enthusiastic support of the Polish society The Volunteer Army was formed on July 1, 1920.On July 3, 1920 the Council of National Defence issued an appeal to the citizens to join the military. It was supported by all political parties, except for communists.Conscription poster: “war with the East in the name of law and order - for freedom”:By the end of September 1920, over 100 thousand men volunteered for service.There was also the Blue Army.During WW1 a 100 thousand determined emigré Poles from around the world overcame various obstacles in order to fight on the French side on behalf of the non existent at the time Poland.The Blue Army volunteered again for the conflict with the Bolsheviks. They managed to obtain some of the equipment no longer needed by the demobilized French. In April 1919 the Blue Army was transported to Poland on 383 trains- together with their equipment, which included 70 more or less usable tanks. The tanks were not designed for the speed and manoeuvrability required on the vast open territories of Poland/Ukraine but it was better than nothing.Morale was high among the population and within the military:Poles were fighting to preserve Polish heritage, as evoked in another recruitment poster, showing a glimpse of the statue of Jan Sobieski’s victory at Vienna:In contrast, Bolsheviks were known for looting whatever they could, desecrating and destroying whatever they couldn’t grab:News of it strengthened the determination on the Polish side.“Every doorstep is our fortress”.The Polish Army fought the Bolsheviks, Communist partisan forces, and also the 20-25,000 Makhnovist ‘Black’ Army in the Ukraine, who were fighting different sides at different stages.Poles also had some foreign assistance from the region.Several thousand non Polish nationals fought on the side of Poland, either incorporated in the army or in partisan units:Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusian, Cossacks, Finns, Swedes, Latvians, Estonians and some Germans - mainly those who had previously lived in the tsarist Russia and didn’t like the transformation.Some of the units turned out to be subversive groups sent in by the Bolsheviks. On the whole, the majority of the Red deserters were genuine, keen, and a useful addition after some vetting was introduced.The support that did exist for the cause, both on the part of Polish and foreign soldiers on the Polish side, was solid because it came from conviction rather than coercion.The efforts at home were boosted by the substantial Hungarian supplies of munitions, field kitchens and other provisions, which Romania allowed to be transported through her territory, in spite of the Romanian-Hungarian conflict going on at the time. Romania also secured Pokuttya, a strategically important strip of land which allowed for the essential common border and which cut Bolsheviks off from the temporarily communist Hungary.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_occupation_of_PokuttyaThere was a joint Operation Winter with newly independent Republic of Latvia.Another boost were the American Angels, 21 volunteer American airmen who founded the Polish Kościuszko air squadron, and then took part in combat and reconnaissance missions.I wrote more about it here:https://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-heroes-to-the-people-of-Poland/answer/Lidia-FedorskaMilitary intelligence.When General Sikorski was handing the Virtuti Military high order to polyglot and cryptologist Jan Kowalewski, he said: “This is for winning the war, lieutenanat”.The advanced short-waved radio system and breaking Russian codes allowed the Polish Army Cipher Bureau (with a team of mathematicians) to decipher a few thousand Soviet military messages during the course of the war.Photo from: “5 kompania 1 pułku Piechoty Legionów zakłada podsłuch telefoniczny. Boryspol. 06.1920. Źródło: CAW”The Red Army staff employed the same signals and security procedures that the Tsarist military had used during World War I, which made the job of intercepting and processing information easier for the employees of the Polish Cipher Bureau. Many of them had previously served in the former Russian Imperial Army and spoke fluently the languages of the partitioning powers.In the critical days of the Battle of Warsaw Polish radio-telegraphers blocked Tuchachevsky’s orders to his troops by reading the Bible (doubly frustrating for the iconoclasts) non stop for a few days, on the same frequency as that used by the Soviet radio station. As a result the commander lost contact with his headquarters and the troops marched north instead of following the order to turn south.The Poles were scrupulous about following up and verifying information, unlike overconfident Tukhachevsky who dismissed a piece of crucial intelligence presented to him by one of his officers. Afterwards it turned out to have been a copy of Piłsudski’s plan.Strategic decisionsA couple of incidents turned out particularly decisive in favour of Poland:At a time when Warsaw victory was critical, chief political commissar of the South-Western front, Joseph Stalin, disobeyed Tukhachevsky’s order to push towards Warsaw andpressured Budyonny towards Lviv instead. Budyonny suffered a defeat there. His horse army would have been more useful for the Reds in Warsaw. A bit of luck for Poland.2. At a time when the situation looked bleak for the Polish side, and against all advice, Piłsudski took the offensive when it was least expected. If this move had failed Poland would be lost again.Piłsudski even prepared his resignation as Poland’s commander in chief, in case he failed. A bit of lucky risk taking that paid off.Lord D'Abernon, a British diplomat and observer of events in Warsaw described in his diaries/memoirs Piłsudski’s disregard of the advice of a French strategist sent to Poland:" Weygand complains bitterly of the surly attitude of Marshal Pilsudski :Last night, at a Council of War, Pilsudski hardly said a word to him, but discussed for two and a half hours in Polish, and paid no attention whatsoever to his presence. He was anxious to throw up his work at once . . the Poles listened to advice very unwillingly, only told him what suited them, and were not grateful for assistance." They made amends later.”On this occasion Piłsudski’s slightly infamous surliness could be justified by the fact that classic French strategy of the time was based on static warfare, which would have failed in this situation. At least “amends were made later”.Lucky breaks and unpredictable turns which we call a Miracle.When all looked lost came the battle for Warsaw, which has gone down in Polish history as the “Miracle on the Vistula”.In spite of winning some battles, prospect of victory was increasingly tipping in favour of the better equipped Red Army with its endless reinforcements.At one time things looked so promising that Lenin wrote to Stalin asking if he should consider a revolution in Italy. “It would be a sin not to try,” Stalin replied.On 5 July 1920, the Polish front in the north collapsed.The 15th of August was the day of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Patron of Poland).On this day the Poles attacked on the left flank; a day later they began an attack on the right wing. The enemy was completely taken aback and failed to put up significant resistance.A film based on the events picks up on the symbolism that lifted spirits at the time, as Warsaw forces are getting ready to confront the Bolsheviks on the day:During these few dramatic days in mid-August 1920, the exhausted Polish soldiers and the doggedly determined volunteers defied probability - they managed to stop the advance on Warsaw and also to regroup their forces in preparation for a massive counteroffensive.The battle of Warsaw destroyed the Red’s aura of invincibility and communism’s impetus of inevitability.After the Warsaw victory only sporadic fighting continued.The outcome of the war dumbfounded both sides:At one point the Moscow Politburo, unaware that their provisional government in Białystok had packed up and fled, issued a statement urging Poles to lay down their weapons and join the world revolution : )They were not the only ones in disbelief of the sudden turn of events: When Piłsudski returned to Warsaw he expected euphoria. He encountered gloom. Few people believed what they were hearing from the front.A more succinct explanation of the unexpected Polish victory comes from Major de Gaulle, (later general and president of France) who took part in the fighting. He wrote in his diary:“Our Poles have grown wings.” :)Marshall Piłsudski was credited with the Warsaw victory:The peace negotiations were finalised in Riga on 18 March 1921.Lenin and Trotsky abandoned their vision of a Communist Europe. On March 21, 1921 War Communism policy was replaced with the New Economic policy, with the declaration to create “communism in one country,” that would serve as an example to nations everywhere.Later, the fate of the Poles and other minorities who found themselves on the Soviet side of the border was tragic.Further reading:The Polish Cipher Office and the “Miracle on the Vistula”https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/military-history/polish-ciphers/Davies, Norman White Eagles, Red Star: The Polish-Soviet War 1919-1920 & the ‘The Miracle on the Vistula’ (Pimlico-Random House, UK-Macdonald, 1972-2003).Adam Zamoyski, Warsaw 1920. Lenin’s failed conquest of Europe. (London, 2008). YC.2008.a.8810Edgar Vincent (lord D'Abernon), The Eighteenth decisive battle of the world. Warsaw, 1920, (London, 1931). 9100.aaa.20http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/18th-april-1931/33/the-eighteenth-decisive-battleGrzegorz Nowik, Wojna światów 1920: Bitwa Warszawska, (Poznań, 2011). ZF.2013.a.26243

I wave my flag proud knowing fully well our achievements since we formed. To quote Nnamdi Azikwe after the first coup, “…we are happy to claim that not a drop of British or Nigerian blood was shed in the course of our national struggle for our place in the sun…Her Majesty’s Government has presented self-government to us on a platter of gold”[1]. But we have since fallen from that platter, forgetting what we united for 57years ago.In 1963, we stopped being a parliamentary democray. We declared Nigeria a federation, a federation of 4 regions and a weak central government. It is true there was competition between these regions, a competition that lead to confusion, distrust and ultimately, war. The “wild wild west” was disorganised, the mid west was a coalition of minorities, the east accused the north of hogging power, Balewa's government refused to intervene. As a result, a group of predominantly eastern soldiers plotted to overthrow the government. They killed our leaders but struggled to form a central governmernt. They failed. The military took control of the government. A countercoup supported by the northern elites lead to the rise of Gowon, and the birth of the Civil war.[2]An aching declaration by Ojukwu sparked the flame.“Now, therefore, I, Lieutenant-Colonel Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, Military Governor of Eastern Nigeria, by virtue of the authority, and pursuant to the principles, recited above, do hereby solemnly proclaim that the territory and region known as and called Eastern Nigeria together with her continental shelf and territorial waters shall henceforth be an independent sovereign state of the name and title of “The Republic of Biafra”. [3]Just 7years after the unity we displayed in '60 came threats of secession. The new country was torn. We never lost a life fighting the colonists but we lost 3million lives fighting ourselves in a war over power and territory. Fought with the egos of men at heart and the interest of the masses forgotten. Now today, we hear the same rhetoric, from a younger generation who seem to have forgotten a crucial time in our history. If the future leads us to our past, then what progress have we made?The war resulted in a Nigerian victory but at great costs. The following 29 years was a political mess. Coup after coup, the military largely remained in control but the Nigerian people quickly lost confidence. In 1979, we returned to a civilian government, an american style of democracy, the second republic. Shagari's government was accused of extreme levels of corruption and following the military coup of 1983, democracy was lost again. 1970–1999 was characterised by an oil boom and of course, political struggle. The average Nigerian got richer but more oppressed.The general election of 1993 excited the Nigerian public of the possibility of a return to democracy. That excitement soon became protests and shutdowns following the annulment of the election, whom many Nigerians felt was won by MKO Abiola. The Babangida regime was considered the most corrupt and established the tradition of corruption in the Nigerian government. He lost favour with the public, and stepped down. But not before he put in place a military interim regime which lasted 82days until Sani Abacha, a dictator at heart, took control of the government. He died in 1998 and the government was headed by AbdulSalam Abubakar. AbdulSalam adopted a new constitution and transferred power to the Civilians in 1999. Olusegun Obasanjo, a former military head of state, became president.Finally, with a return to democracy, Nigeria enjoyed investments and gradually got richer. It's economy boomed until the 2016 recession. In 2014, we became the largest economy in Africa.Recently, there has been calls for political restructuring siting the northern dominance in current politics as a reason.Nigeria has faced a recurring threat since 2002. A threat whose shit got real in 2014 and has become a hot topic following the infamous 2014 Chibok Schoolgirls abduction. Bokoharam, Nigeria's resident terrorist group. The Bokoharam has gradually weakened followed by the Nigerian military offenses and internal strife with the group having a duo-leeadership.Nigeria's economy was crippled following the 2016 fall in oil price and activities of the Niger Delta Avengers, a militant group who claim to fight for the rights of their land, accusing the government of not doing enough to assist the south south. This threat has been silent following renegotiations between the FG and the people of the region.A new Biafran secession has been the main feature of news in recent times but no solution seems to be in sight. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.Generally, in almost all indications, Nigeria has gotten better.Economically,The GDP per Capita, in Nigeria, when adjusted by Purchasing Power Parity is equivalent to 31 percent of the world's average. GDP per capita PPP inNigeria averaged 3897.24 USD from 1990 until 2016, reaching an all time high of 5671.90 USD in 2014 and a record low of 2750.10 USD in 1995.[4]In terms of eductaion, we've improved but can do better.After the 1970s oil boom, tertiary education was improved so that it would reach every subregion of Nigeria. 68% of the Nigerian population is literate, and the rate for men (75.7%) is higher than that for women (60.6%).[5]But societally, we still lag behind.Child marriage remains common in Northern Nigeria.39% of girls are married before age 15, although the Marriage Rights Act banning marriage of girls below 18 years of age was introduced on a federal level in 2008.Submission of the wife to her husband and domestic violence are common. Women have less land rightsMaternal mortality was at 814 per 100,000 Iive births in 2015.Nigeria's human rights record remains poor;according to the US Department of State,the most significant human rights problems are: use of excessive force by security forces; impunity for abuses by security forces; arbitrary arrests; prolonged pretrial detention; judicial corruption and executive influence on the judiciary; rape, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of prisoners, detainees and suspects; harsh and life‑threatening prison and detention centre conditions; human trafficking for the purpose of prostitution and forced labour; societal violence and vigilante killings; child labour, child abuse and child sexual exploitation; domestic violence; discrimination based on ethnicity, region and religion.In the Nigerian state of Akwa Ibom about 15,000 children were branded as witches and most of them end up abandoned and abused on the streets.Happy Independence Day, fellow patriots and observers. And to this end I'll quote our coat of arms, “Unity and Faith, Peace and progress”. I love Nigeria, but we can do better.Footnotes[1] Nigeria’s Great Speeches[2] Nigerian Civil War - Wikipedia[3] Ojukwu’s 1967 speech that called for secession of Biafra - Vanguard News[4] https://www.google.com.ng/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/gdp-per-capita-ppp&ved=0ahUKEwi7xanhr8_WAhXsIsAKHZ6WDZwQFggvMAI&usg=AOvVaw1KhjYO9DzLresF0NwyrHd2[5] Nigeria - Wikipedia