>Ted, Ted, Ted, Ted, Ted,
>
>You miss the point entirely. Even if female part timers make the same as
>male part timers, the part time work factor disadvantages women more
>than men because there are so many more women part timers than men part
>timers. Get it?
No, actually I don't, since that only proves that the demand for women part
timers is greater than that of men part timers.
>Ergo, the REAL annual income gap between men and women is much greater
>than that which is quoted in the press, because that press figure is
>always based on a comparison of full time workers only. Get it?
Nope, not exactly, because you just admitted that the pay of women is equal
to the pay of men in part time work. Besides which, why should the press
use part-time workers. If you did that, you would include a plethora of
both female and male teens.
>Ted, I know you would like to prove that women are not an oppressed
>class so that you can feel justified and righteous in the monumental
>priveleges you enjoy, but throwing random numbers at the wall, trying
>to make them stick, ain't going to make it so.
Sort of like the random numbers abuse counseling centers throw around to
make us believe that domestic abuse ravages our country and is unstoppable,
rather than being a serious problem that can be stopped, eh? I'm glad you
believe that just because a number says something doesn't mean that
somebody has fiddled, fidgeted, or taken liberties with it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Meyer
john_meyer@geocities.com
TechBits Poderator
http://members.tripod.com/~john_ludwig_meyer
"Anyone who fights for the future, lives in it today" -Ayn Rand
---------------------------------------------------------------------------