The issue of supposed gender-based “pay inequality” is a prime example of how a simplistic narrative can betray a fuller accounting of reality. While there are a steady supply of studies that suggest that oftentimes women do make less than men, the metrics used by these studies often neglect the real-world factors that drive these simplistic statistics.
Despite the best efforts of liberals, many Americans still subscribe to older views on gender roles in the world. Many fully-capable businesswomen opt to become stay-at-home mothers and in doing so, make no money or make less money than they had before. There are a million small variables that account for this discrepancy within the job market, but for the opportunistic left, there is only one reason why a man would make more in America than a woman: institutional sexism at every level.
Democrats have hung their hopes on the preposterous “War on Women” narrative that asserts that Republicans are engaged in a vendetta designed to undermine the plight of women. This premise is central to Hillary Clinton’s limping presidential campaign.
“Hillary Clinton continues to argue that the deck is stacked for those at the top, making it harder for families to get ahead and stay ahead, especially women,” Hillary’s campaign site reads.
But while Hillary has preferred to paint herself and all women as victims of this supposed institutional misogyny, in truth, if there is a massive conspiracy to pay women less than their male counterparts, her State Department was complicit in it.
According to data from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), when Hillary was Secretary of State, her department paid men an average of $16,000 per year more than female colleagues.
The average annual difference in pay between men and women over the four years was $16,416, according to the OPM data.
Men were paid more, even after accounting for similar ranks in education. For example, in 2009, the average salary for women working in the State Department with a bachelor’s degree was $87,561, while men with the same qualifications were paid $98,752.
While the database doesn’t list specific job descriptions, it does include average salaries for white-collar and blue-collar workers. Male white-collar workers were paid more on average than women.
A white-collar female worker was paid an average salary of $86,099 from 2009 to 2012 while a white-collar male worker was paid $102,909. Blue-collar female workers were paid slightly more than blue-collar male workers. From 2009 to 2012, women in this category earned $48,837 while men earned $47,423.
The State Department also employed more men in higher ranks than women. According to the database, there were 152 more men listed as supervisors in 2009 than women…
Neither the Clinton campaign nor the State Department responded to requests for comment.
The simplistic narrative that men earn more because of sexism is a careful manipulation of facts to contort reality into an easily-digestable narrative for the braindead liberal masses.
There are many, many factors that complicate a study of gender pay inequality. In keeping with the left’s demands, however, perhaps now is the time to place the burden of explanation upon Hillary.
If lower pay for women automatically signals an atmosphere of institutional misogyny, than perhaps Hillary can explain her “War on Women” in the State Department…