I seem to recall that was the figure like 15 years ago. Has it not improved in all this time?

Women still have to bear children, and pregnancy takes a heavy toll on the body, which often results in several fewer years in the workforce.

Until that changes, or we start paying mothers with less experience more money, there will always be a gap.

Wow. That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve read. You have contributed nothing to the discussion, and made us all measurably stupider in the process. Well done.

Great work. With strong arguments like that you’re sure to discredit fascism and advance feminism!

“the arrival of children has a large and persistent impact on the gender earnings gap, reducing female earnings by 55 per cent, on average, in the 5 years following parenthood. We further show, using personal income tax data collected by the Australian Tax Office (ATO), that this gap improves only slightly but remains high in the 10 years following the arrival of children.”

weforum.org/…/reduce-motherhood-penalty-gender-pa…

theconversation.com/the-motherhood-pay-gap-why-wo…

Your entire argument is specious. Nobody but you made any reference to lifetime earnings. Also, you have admitted, quite directly, to being a fascist.

So blow it out your ass, idiot. Since everything coming from you is shit, anyways.

Could you help me understand where his argument is specious?

His primary argument was all about lifetime earning potential. That is not what salary refers to. So, his argument doesn’t actually apply to the allegation. Therefore, it is specious.