Feature
- Do You Hate Your Partner, Too?
- California Teen Avoids Heavy Sentencing by Passing the Buck
- Wanna Buy Your Teenager a Padded Push-Up Bra?
- Vampires in Texas!
- These Guys Are As Bad As Westboro Baptist Church
- Funny Letters Sent to Women's Magazines
- Women's Ski Jumping: Still Not a 'Real' Sport
- Will the World Be Pro-Choice Soon?
- Are We Getting Too Lazy to Even Divorce?
- Forever 21's Maternity Line: Glamorizing Teen Pregnancy?
According to a new report from the National Women’s Law Center, poverty rates for Americans have risen nearly across the board (the only group to see a decrease was the 65 and older demographic, but this was largely due to support from Social Security). These increases have been particularly bad for women, with the highest poverty rate in 15 years. The racial divide was especially apparent with nearly 25 percent of both black and Latino women being in poverty. However, the hardest hit group of women is …
… single mothers, with nearly 40 percent being below the poverty level (this has also contributed to the growing number of impoverished children). The NWLC has stated that the major reason for the increase in poverty is the persistence of the wage gap between men and women, with female labor still worth only 77 cents for every male dollar earned.
In order to decrease this gap, the NWLC urges the passing of the Paycheck Fairness Act, which will help to put stiffer penalties on sex-related pay discrimination. This will likely meet opposition, due to the recent report that childless women under 35 now earn more than their male counterparts, however, that is extremely short-sighted and ignores those that are truly suffering. While it is clear that progress has been made in helping to reduce the wage gap, this has been most pronounced among white-collar workers, who are less likely to be of color and single mothers. Many male politicians (and the mama grizzlies) would like to use these statistics in order to declare feminism and women’s rights obsolete, but it is clear that they are still sorely needed.
You Might Also Like ...
-
-
5
Correlation is not causation. I don’t like the idea of people using the recent gaining of women as an argument against PFA. I also do not like this article using recent poverty increase a tool for PFA either.
.
I agree with most of PFA without either of these two factors. I do still have questions about it though.
What effect will this have on people, in or trying to enter fields, possessing only high school education? People who are self taught that managed to get jobs at levels equal with others that have degrees(I know of many contract IT field people with no college education)?
As for Poverty which this article claims to be about. In 2009 for women it was 13.9% and men 10.5% about 5 million more. I have no doubt the recession has increased both into 2010. Much more goes into the reasons for poverty then just pay discrimination. Women are more likely then men to be single parents, be alive after the age of 65, jobs in construction and heavy lifting can be harder to get(jobs men run to when poor), just to state a few.
Has the definition of poverty changed in that time at all? Have they changed the point at which they declare the poverty line? Because I would need to know that before interpreting this information…
You can increase the penalties for inequality all you want, as long as you only apply them to genuine cases, and not systemic numbers.
I’m going to be completey honest with you Kai. You uesed to drive me crazy with all of your logic posts, but now I really, really admire you at how easily it seems for you to recognize when a factor is missing! I would happily come to you for an opinion any time. :) Thanks for helping me grow in logic and understanding.
Personally I’ve always liked your logic posts, though I will admit that when we’ve been on opposite sides of an issue that liking comes with much grumbling.
thanks!