zlacker

>>andren+(OP)
From my experience location dependence is the greatest obstacle for women to join high earning STEM jobs. With paygap women find it more difficult to live in expensive cities. Also remote work allows more life balance for care givers (who are mostly women).

It should be seen as sexism, if company does not offer remote jobs.

>>jankot+62
Your first two sentences seem like a circular argument. Women can't get the high paying jobs because they don't live in the right places, they can't live in the right places because they can't get the high paying jobs.

>>OscarC+t3
Not really. If woman gets high paying job, she makes less money for the same work.

Also women have more expenses than men (ping tax, daycare...). Big cities are unaffordable even at the same salary.

>>jankot+e4
>>Also women have more expenses than men (ping tax, daycare...).

What's ping tax?

How is daycare more expensive for women? Surely, a man raising a child on their own will pay exactly the same amount of money for daycare? In a normal case, where partners raise children together, they surely pay for daycare from a shared budget, not just from the woman's salary(that would be just bizarre).

>> If woman gets high paying job, she makes less money for the same work.

The counter argument to this is that if this was true, companies would only hire women, since apparently they do the same work for less money!

>>gambit+z4
"Pink tax": the idea that goods marketed to women are priced higher than equivalents marketed to men.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pink+tax

>>psyc+B5
I do not like the typical example of this which is razors. If pink razors are 50% more expensive then you can just buy the blue ones no? They are literally same except for the color.

>>yoz-y+n6
They can, but there is marketing force that fights against this. How many women have only ever looked in the women's aisle for razors and not seen the price differences? These things can appear in aggregate even if individuals could behave a different way.