Jordan Peterson vs The Gender Pay Gap
Video Statistics and Information
Channel: ManOfAllCreation
Views: 3,512,451
Rating: 4.9064016 out of 5
Keywords: jordan peterson gender pay gap, jordan peterson gender, jordan peterson on gender, jordan peterson pay, jordan peterson the wage gap, jordan peterson wage gap, jordan peterson the gender pay gap, jordan peterson, jordan, peterson, the gender pay gap, gender, pay, gap, jordan peterson vs, jordan peterson vs the gender pay gap, gender wage gap, jordan peterson gender wage gap
Id: Xg2psply4no
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 16min 53sec (1013 seconds)
Published: Fri Jan 19 2018
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
I liked the “what’s your favorite female author” interview
I fucking hate gender pay gap enthusiasts with zero evidence and inability to have a formidable conversation...
I could only go 6 minutes. Fuck me. I understand that reality is sometimes a hard pill to swallow, especially when it is contrary to your beliefs and understand the negative emotional response to the person laying it out but you would hope a journalist would be able to see the forest through the trees. I'm just glad that from what I saw the author handled it like a champ.
Does anyone hate this interviewer as much as I do? She’s seems like a complete idiot who has a chip on her shoulder.
I've had this argument with far too many persons who simply refuse to believe that the gender pay gap isn't solely based on gender. There are many variables at play here: level of education of the person, location of work being done (think cost of living), years of experience in the industry, and most importantly, the ACTUAL OCCUPATION. A person with a PhD in Maths and a grade school teacher are simply not going to have the same salary.
That said, there are many occupations that are gender-dominated. Men tend to dominate hands-on and technical fields, whereas women tend to dominate the Arts and education, and this dominance is based on PREFERENCE. And, based on the industries themselves, persons in hands-on and technical fields typically outearn persons in the Arts and education sectors. There are very few instances of a male outearning a woman simply cos he's a male (this is assuming both persons work in the same industry, have the same level of education, same credentials, same job experience / time with the company, and same ability).
EDIT: added the fact that male dominated fields vs. female dominated fields are based on personal preferences. Men tend to prefer to work in hands-on, technical fields whereas women tend to prefer to work in fields that are more related to the Arts and education.
EDIT II: @ /u/hepheuua, I'm not making the same mistake. It is a fact that men dominate hands-on, technical fields and women dominate the Arts and education-based careers. I agree with most of what you're arguing being that women and men were (I no longer find this to be true) brought up in manners that would lead them down certain career paths. But that doesn't invalidate the fact of the technical v. Arts argument I've made. It is NOT a fact, however, that women are categorically earning less than men, per my comments above. And to your comment about entering "hostile environments," this goes both ways. Men who enter female dominated fields often receive the same treatment. I will concede this though: it's getting better. For everyone.
Men are half the working population in the US, but are 93% of workplace fatalities. Is that because they tend to work in higher risk/higher reward (paying) occupations?
“There’s a gender pay gap between women and men in the UK.”
“Well women are more agreeable than men.”
“So you’re saying women aren’t too agreeable to get their deserved salaries?
“No, no. Not at all.”
“Female traits don’t predict success in the workplace, intelligence and conciousness do.”
“So you think the problem is that.. women aren’t intelligent enough?”
Jordan Peterson is very difficult to listen to and i imagine very challenging to interview because he chooses his words in such a way that you MUST make assumptions as to what he’s implying. He’ll make a very blatant, universally agreed upon statement and then you’re forced to extrapolate what you can. And then no matter what you assume you’re dubbed crazy.
This interviewer in particular was obviously falling off and assuming too much, but I think every time somebody has to refute Peterson some version of this happens.
I could've watched this all day. As frustrating as it was, I liked watching how he was going to react to her planting whatever she wanted.
Everybody is all for science and data analysis.... until it indicates something against what they want or the answer that they were looking for.