I think that for non custodial men that choice is called working below their capability and their income for cs is imputed. Why are custodial parent never accorded the same consideration and their income potential is equally required for maintaining themselves and their children.....and if not working full time...aka Lizzie...then impute their income??

You also have problems giving support and finacial resources to your children if you are not working. But then that is where you expect or demand the child support? So if the father wants to move on and assist in supporting a new family...he can be hobbled by your need to be there for the children....even if you have the benefit of a new husband....

But yes having children can be daunting and it can be a challenge balancing choices.

And I made a choice to do those things...and with that choice is an easily understood reality that I am not good material for advancement beyond where i am at this time....but i could have demanded my ex step up and co parent allowing me or enabling me to be more advancement material....but i was not interested...and truth be told...without really knowing you...I doubt it was a lack of a penis....it was a lack or required commitment to the job that would have held you back that would have enabled you to work and be there for your company as well as balance or occasionally miss things with/for your children.

Career choice and personal choice ....I made mine and have no problem and do not blame others for the results.

Love a world that pays the same without having a requirement of working the same hours! Or the same income is paid for doing the same job?

QFT. The Wage Gap is a myth. Women make different choices, and those choices affect how they work. Women often place more importance on their relationships - caring for children, parents, spouses, etc. - than on their careers. Women are more likely to enter and leave the workforce to raise children, take care of elderly parents or move with their families. Working mothers are nearly twice as likely to take time off to care for their children as are working fathers in dual-earner couples. Women are also more likely to work part-time. In 2000, one-quarter of all women employees worked part-time, compared to less than 10 percent of men. Nearly 85 percent of those who worked part-time did so for non-economic reasons. Beyond work behavior, women gravitate to sectors of the economy that compensate workers at lower levels.

While women hold 53 percent of all professional jobs in the United States, they hold only 28 percent of jobs in professions averaging $40,000 or more in annual compensation.

QFT. The Wage Gap is a myth. Women make different choices, and those choices affect how they work. Women often place more importance on their relationships - caring for children, parents, spouses, etc. - than on their careers. Women are more likely to enter and leave the workforce to raise children, take care of elderly parents or move with their families. Working mothers are nearly twice as likely to take time off to care for their children as are working fathers in dual-earner couples. Women are also more likely to work part-time. In 2000, one-quarter of all women employees worked part-time, compared to less than 10 percent of men. Nearly 85 percent of those who worked part-time did so for non-economic reasons. Beyond work behavior, women gravitate to sectors of the economy that compensate workers at lower levels.

And why do you think that is, Einstein?



While women hold 53 percent of all professional jobs in the United States, they hold only 28 percent of jobs in professions averaging $40,000 or more in annual compensation.

Wait, didn't you just said that the wage gap is a myth?

Gender differences in career choices: Why girls don’t like science
November 1, 2007



Women in post-secondary education
Educational attainment among Canadian women has risen rapidly over the past few decades. In 1971, only 3% of Canadian women held a university degree.[1] By contrast, 15% of women had a university degree in 2001 and women currently outnumber men at most levels of post-secondary education (see Figure 1). However, women remain sharply under-represented in some fields of study, particularly mathematics, physical sciences, engineering and applied sciences. This is true at all levels of post-secondary education, including college, undergraduate and graduate levels of study (see Figure 2). In contrast, women are over-represented in other fields of study, including education and health sciences (see Figure 3).

Women in the labour force
The dearth of women in scientific fields of study is reflected by a similar under-representation of women in science and engineering occupations. Over the past three decades, women in Canada have joined the labour force in ever-increasing numbers: as of 2006, women accounted for 47% of all workers in Canada. Over the same period, women have accounted for a steadily increasing proportion of workers in health care and social assistance and educational services, but the relative proportion of women in professional, scientific and technical services has declined (compared to the overall proportion of women in the labour force; see Figure 4).


The under-representation of women in science and engineering contributes to a gender-based wage gap. In recent years, real wages have declined in female-dominated disciplines such as health and education while real wages have increased in male-dominated disciplines such as engineering, mathematics, computer science and physical sciences. For example, the occupations most commonly held by young women with university degrees are elementary and kindergarten teachers.[2] Between 1995 and 2000, average earnings for women in these occupations increased by less than 1%. In contrast, earnings for young men in computer and information systems (the most commonly held occupations among young university-educated men) increased by 15% (see Table 1).

Although young women are now significantly more likely than young men to pursue post-secondary studies, young women have made little progress in closing the wage gap. In 1991, 21% of young women and 16% of young men (aged 25 to 29) held university degrees, and young women earned 20% less than young men. By 2001, 34% of young women held university degrees, compared to 21% of young men. Nonetheless, young women still earned 18% less than young men.

Given that young women in Canada clearly see the value of a post-secondary education, what keeps them from pursuing studies in science and engineering?

Differences in Adolescents’ Planned Majors and Earned Degrees: Perceived Competence or Early Family Commitment? Abstract To help explain the persistence of gender inequality in the workplace, it is important to understand why young women and men continue to pursue different academic majors in college. In this paper, I test competing theories of women’s stalled progress in elite college majors such as math, science, and engineering. The first, Jacobs’ social control hypothesis (1995), argues that young women’s enduring commitment to family limits their success in elite academic majors. The second, argued by Correll (2001; 2004), is that cultural beliefs about gender negatively affect women’s perceptions of their abilities in math and science related tasks. Using the National Education Longitudinal Study, I examine young women’s and men’s intended college majors in 1992 as high school seniors and their earned degrees eight years later. Majors are categorized as: traditionally female majors, non-physical sciences, social sciences/business, and physical science/engineering. My findings suggest that math-efficacy is a significant predictor of adolescents’ intentions to major in math/science and later achievements, but it does explain young women’s and men’s different choices in college major. Instead, adolescents’ early orientations toward family commitment are essential to understanding contemporary gender segregation of academic majors, lending greater support for Jacobs’ social control hypothesis.

Women’s educational advances signify one of the most striking examples of American social change in the past century. Historically, young men’s educational achievements surpassed those of women, with men being far more likely to enroll in and complete college, as well as achieve post-graduate and professional educational credentials. However, in the wake of the Women’s Movement, young women’s educational achievements have steadily risen. Among contemporary cohorts, women are considerably more likely to achieve bachelor’s and master’s degrees (NCES 2000). Moreover, since the 21 st century, young women’s achievements of professional degrees such as law and medical degrees have reached near parity with men (NCES 2000; 2005). While women have made remarkable strides within higher education, there remains persistent gender inequality at work, as measured by both occupational sex segregation and the gender pay gap. Scholars who study women’s striking gains in the educational arena remain puzzled as to why women’s post-secondary achievements have not ‘paid off’ in terms of eradicating gender inequality in the workplace (Bradley 2000). How can we reconcile resilient gender inequality in the workplace in spite of women’s rising educational ambitions and accomplishments? Part of the answer lies in the divergent educational pathways that young women and men take as they move through university, specifically the sex segregation of academic majors. Generally speaking, research on occupational sex segregation and gender inequality in earnings measure educational achievements only in terms of educational transitions such as earned college degree and post-graduate degree, rather than in terms of the academic major of the educational degree (Bradley 2000). Yet, women’s and men’s pattern of course-taking .

Women’s educational advances signify one of the most striking examples of American social change in the past century. Historically, young men’s educational achievements surpassed those of women, with men being far more likely to enroll in and complete college, as well as achieve post-graduate and professional educational credentials. However, in the wake of the Women’s Movement, young women’s educational achievements have steadily risen. Among contemporary cohorts, women are considerably more likely to achieve bachelor’s and master’s degrees (NCES 2000). Moreover, since the 21stcentury, young women’s achievements of professional degrees such as law and medical degrees have reached near parity with men (NCES 2000; 2005). While women have made remarkable strides within higher education, there remains persistent gender inequality at work, as measured by both occupational sex segregation and the gender pay gap. Scholars who study women’s striking gains in the educational arena remain puzzled as to why women’s post-secondary achievements have not ‘paid off’ in terms of eradicating gender inequality in the workplace (Bradley 2000). How can we reconcile resilient gender inequality in the workplace in spite of women’s rising educational ambitions and accomplishments? Part of the answer lies in the divergent educational pathways that young women and men take as they move through university, specifically the sex segregation of academic majors. Generally speaking, research on occupational sex segregation and gender inequality in earnings measure educational achievements only in terms of educational transitions such as earned college degree and post-graduate degree, rather than in terms of the academic major of the educational degree (Bradley 2000). Yet, women’s and men’s pattern of course-taking and majors of earned degrees remain highly differentiated, even among contemporary cohorts (NCES 2000; 2005; Bradley 2000; Charles and Bradley 2002). More specifically, whereas women have carved substantial inroads into some majors such as business and the social sciences, other male-dominated majors such as physical science and engineering remain examples of stubborn inequality (Xie and Shauman 2003; Jacobs 1995; 1996; Charles and Bradley 2002). Furthermore, contemporary women remain largely concentrated within traditionally female academic majors that lead to career paths characterized by low prestige and pay, such as education and the humanities (NCES 2000; 2005). Given that many elite and lucrative occupations require advanced educational credentials in math/science as prerequisites for entry, women’s concentration within traditionally female fields of study signals that women’s rising educational achievement may not necessarily lead to greater gender equity in the workplace. Past research on gender differences in choice of major often focused exclusively on factors that limited women’s access to math/science majors. This line of research identified several factors that contribute to young women’s lower achievement in science including women’s lower early interest in math/science, lower academic preparation, and lower math efficacy. While these dynamics may help explain women’s stalled progress into elite majors such as physical sciences and engineering, little research addresses the underpinning for young women’s continued commitment to traditionally female majors, despite their increased educational opportunity in other fields of study and the lower economic rewards associated with training in education, health occupations, and humanities. In the late 1970s, Polachek (1978) argued that young women pursued typically female-dominated majors because these fields lead to careers that more easily balanced the competing goals of work and family. Jacobs (1995; 1996) posed a similar argument, namely that family considerations hamper young women’s schooling and work decisions in spite of increasing educational opportunity for women. Yet, social change regarding women’s role within higher education, the workplace, and the family seems to signal more favorable prospects for young women to balance competing the priorities of work and family, such that commitment to family may no longer factor as heavily in women’s decisions to pursue traditionally female majors. In order to better understand the role of post-secondary education in either undermining or reinforcing gender inequality in the workplace, further research is needed to identify the sources of young women’s and men’s divergent educational trajectories within the university setting. Specifically, this research should provide greater insight into those factors that continue to attract women to traditionally female majors, despite the lower prestige and economic rewards that characterize these fields.

You do realize you just said that she STAYED at home while you worked two jobs. Yet you also state that you did just as much child-rearing than she did??? She did not change diapers, you did? She did not spent most her days with the kids while they where in infancy then, I guess?

Anyway - this is useless. Your lack of opening to even TRY to understand this is so flagrant it's not even worth discussing.

Your reaction to this list of what woman must go through every day - it makes me angry, because it degrades the image of men. It is because of men like you than our ENTIRE gender is seen as so retarded and backward.

I think they deserve equal treatment.

How so? Other than in parenting and custody areas, how would men NOT have equal opportunity exactly? Or even higher, better opportunities to be precise?

Boys fail to make the grade - in class or relationships, author say
By Shannon Proudfoot, Canwest News ServiceApril 18, 2010

Boys lag behind girls and emerge from school ill-prepared for a world that demands stronger language skills than ever before, according to a new book, and their careers and even their relationship prospects are suffering as a result.

In Why Boys Fail: Saving our Sons from an Educational System That's Leaving Them Behind, former USA Today writer Richard Whitmire argues that the gaps between boys and girls are only widening, but there's resistance to acknowledging and fixing the problem.

"It's politically incorrect to watch out for the boys," he says. "There's still this mindset that girls have to be protected and nurtured, that men succeed so well in the marketplace, let's not worry about them. I don't think people realize the implications of not doing something."

The central contention of Whitmire's book is that: "The world has gotten more verbal; boys haven't."

Girls have an easier time with reading and language than boys in the earliest years of school, he says, but until the past two decades, boys would catch up by the time they reached Grade 4 or 5. Now, however, school curricula are more challenging in earlier grades - particularly when it comes to language - and many boys never get a firm footing in reading, he says.

And with science and math increasingly taught in word-problem format, boys struggling with language fall behind in other subjects, Whitmire says.

"Some boys absorb it just fine but a fair number don't, and they struggle, they get turned off to reading," he says. "They look around and see that mostly girls are succeeding and they conclude that school is for girls and look elsewhere for satisfaction."

Barry MacDonald, a Vancouver-based education counsellor and author of Boy Smarts: Mentoring Boys for Success at School, says boys tend to like visual, active learning and feel alienated by "traditional" classrooms where every answer has to be written down. He doesn't favour single-sex classrooms, but he says there aren't enough role models to show boys that learning and reading doesn't have to be girls' work.

"The gender straitjacket has actually tightened up for us males. It's almost like we have this pumped-up-on-steroids version of masculinity now and boys are simply responding to it," he says. "That reality says you're a suck-up if you like what the school does."

Canadian girls once lagged in science and math, but in recent years they've closed the gaps, according to results of the Programme for International Student Assessment from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and they're now even further ahead of boys in reading and writing skills.

Sex differences in academic achievement are more stark in Canada than in many OECD countries, says Paul Cappon, president and CEO of the Canadian Council on Learning, and the fallout is obvious on university campuses: Just 39 per cent of university graduates in Canada are male, he says, when it was an even balance just a couple of decades ago.

"That's an enormous change in a generation," he says. "That's a societal wave, a tsunami."

And boys are eschewing university right when they need it most, Whitmire says.

Post-secondary education is "the new high school" in terms of being a basic job requirement in the eyes of many employers, he says, and strong reading and writing abilities have become a universal necessity. Even hands-on workers such as police officers and contractors are required to produce complex written reports as part of their jobs, he says, putting boys who struggle in school or drop out at a major disadvantage.

"The requirements of literacy in a knowledge society are so different, so fundamentally more advanced than they were a generation ago," Cappon concurs.

But Whitmire believes the most damaging potential result of the academic struggles of boys isn't economic at all, but personal: the "marriageable mate dilemma." Women are usually reluctant to "marry down" in terms of education, he says, and the imbalance on university campuses means there will ultimately be a dearth of degree-holding men to be potential mates for all the female graduates.

"Will they marry down? A lot of people think that they will. I don't share that, I don't think they will," he says, adding he believes it's more likely some won't marry at all. "What's the point? If they're not going to be a true companion, as in an intellectual equal, and their earnings are not going to be comparable, then the incentives for marriage wane."

But the focus of the marriageable mate issue is generally on the implications for children and families or on women's options, he says, and the boys who will grow into men who may have a hard time finding a mate are forgotten.

"It's a personal fulfilment issue," he says. "I think the personal side is really, really important and I think it's under-appreciated."

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

Tealwood: Now a sense of privilege or entitlement....Cappy??? you still sharing custodial parenting 50/50 with your ex wife.....while paying cs...while she either is not employed or not working a full time job? Am I correct in assuming you are to start earning less to fall into line with CS ideas of men and woman earning the same overall income?

...while it's speculation, I think you've spent your whole life being indoctrinated in the female dominated education system. YOU are incapable of seeing things as the ARE. YOU have never lived or worked in the real world. YOU have very limited, real life, experience.

I ask you: Have you EVER had a real job in the real world or have you spent all of you adult life in academia?

YOU are a bigger problem than someone like me because you work at keeping women victims rather than helping them be responsible and equal participants. (...) people with your belief system are doing women AND men a great disservice by working so hard to maintain women's victim status.

I realize that you believe women are downtrodden and oppressed, have no opportunities, face the mythical Glass Ceiling created by the mythical Patriachy. I also have read enough of your posting to understand that you believe you look at the world in a balance way.

Funnily enough, just this morning I read an article about boys in the educational system and what it could very well mean for males my sons' ages. (...) I realize that you will likely poo-poo this growing body of evidence and research, but I am very concerned about it. You talk about equality, but you only see one side of things.

I don't believe for a second that you started this thread in order to learn better about the problem with men paying CS for non-bio children You bias is clear and very entrenched.

Happy?

On one hand, you accuse me on "trying to maintain women's victim status" while on the other hand, you keep crying about how victimized the men are in the current system.

I have said before, and I repeat, if you want people to take you seriously when you claim that men are living unequal treatment about parenting and child support; you HAVE to acknowledge what women ALSO live large unequal treatment in the society.

Now; the list of 43 points I posted in msg #135 is not from me.

It's what women studies have found over and over... I am telling you what women studies have found

Take Tealwood's research for instance. Both show that there *IS* a clear gender gap between jobs. We can argue and debate about why these difference are there and where they come from. But that's not what you do, no!!

"Single fathers, male role model, the boy code, custody and equality: Paradox?" http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts13659689.aspx remember?

Frankly, I could care less about what you beleive my motives are.

I am still highly surprised (and, if true, quite dismayed) at the idea that a law could force step-parents towards obligations to the child (that part is okay for me)

I started this thread both to better understand the problematic related to loco parentis, and to discuss and debate the equally important issue of the psychological needs of a child vs a step parent who is, for all purposes, a parent to him/her. Frankly, I could care less about what you beleive my motives are.

alwood's research for instance. Both show that there *IS* a clear gender gap between jobs. We can argue and debate about why these difference are there and where they come from.

et's see? I have a B.Sc. in mathematical computation and operational research; I have been on the workforce since I was 19 years old; and in my professional field as a specialist since 1993; I also have done 3 years in engineering prior to switching to maths & op. research. In 1999 I went for a certificate in business school to learn how to startup a business, and in 2001, I created and incorporated my own consulting company and have been steadily employed as an autonomous consultant since the; today my services are sold in the excess of $80.00 per hour.

, I could care less about what you beleive my motives are.

And why do you think that is, Einstein?

CS...I have asked this before and I will ask this again.

Since you lean or are in favour of step parents being financially responsible for the children after the breakdown of the relationship ...

I am still highly surprised (and, if true, quite dismayed) at the idea that a law could force step-parents towards obligations to the child (that part is okay for me) without also granting that step parent with rights (that part is very wrong to me). (message #25)

So will you come out and advocate ...clearly and without reservation...

This after all would suggest you are interested in the children...the children from the relationship the children or step children from all sides of the equation and not what some of us men see as your only consideration or requirement is seeing the custodial primary parent being able to get as much coin as she can.

to me it really is only equal or equitable when you acknowledge the finacial contributions both before and after if you are going to stand behind step parents being financially liable.

So CS....you can sound so politically correct and so socially concerned about the situation of financial resources for the children and its situation for the custodial parent...

i think you would lose the support of custodial mothers when they see both non custodial fathers getting the time with the children and the suggestion of lowered cs as there would no longer be a claim of of majority time costs...

Not anything I would have expected? So my assumption of perpetual student and one living off the social programs would make me an ass it seems?

$80 per hour....would suggest you are in a very attractive tax bracket if you were successful...

Working only 36hours per week...imagine what he would earn if he was working the 40---50 hour work week that many see as a full time work week?

But that is a great accomplishment for someone working 17yrs...since age 20....most 20 year old I thought would still be in school?

But then perhaps we are seriously underestimating this humanitarian ...

i have never really concerned myself with what your motives are....i just have issues with the delivery and often the apparent one sided nature of your arguments...

But why not answer one question... If you support step parents being required to pay cs...

...do you then also agree that the income of step parents should be used when re-allocating financial resources between 2 households?

Because women, just like men, make choices and should be responsible for them. They don't get to play the "I was bullied by societal expectations!" card anymore. Remember, this is the 21st century, not the mid-50s... Einstein.

Frankly, I am not a financial specialist and, I repeat, I don't really care about the financial side of this.

...why is it that i would always have great reservations if i had to have someone with CS sit and tell them what is the best thing to do in handling family dynamics in terms of equal balanced gender issues?

In their analysis of gender differences in educational majors, Charles and Bradley (2002) argue that even in seemingly gender egalitarian societies- characterized by increasing educational and work opportunity for women- gendered educational trajectories are normative. The authors attribute the persistence of sex segregation in higher education to cultural values about gender that validate the notion that women and men can be both “equal and different”, which in turn legitimates divergent educational pathways for women and men that are characterized by unequal prestige and rewards. Though not their immediate concern, Charles and Bradley (2002), speculate that women’s and men’s different choices about educational major could stem from “…anticipated work/family conflicts, taken-for-granted gender labels, or deeply rooted curricular preferences...”.
Source: http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/4/4/3/pages104439/p104439-5.php, my emphasis added.

While women hold 53 percent of all professional jobs in the United States, they hold only 28 percent of jobs in professions averaging $40,000 or more in annual compensation.

do you ever address the decision of working full time versus part time?

Though the issue still warrants further investigation, my work suggests that understanding the unique ways that family commitment shapes women’s and men’s decisions about potential educational and work opportunities is key to making sense of women’s continued commitment to traditionally female majors.
Source: http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/4/4/3/pages104439/p104439-5.php, my emphasis added.

Or what about studies that show occupational orientation in terms of educational choices also differ between men and woman where pay is not the determining factor in terms of job satisfaction or career choice for woman. But i think pay is for men often a major determining factor in their choice of a career and then a factor in their educational direction.

Research investigating gender differences in science aptitude suggests that boys and girls have similar levels of ability. (...) In fact, no gender difference in aptitude was found between elementary and middle-school boys and girls. [3] These findings suggest that cultural or environmental factors, rather than biological ones, affect girls’ interests and career choices.
Source: http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Reports/LessonsInLearning/LinL20071101_Gender_differences_in_science.htm?Language=EN, My emphasis added

Parents may inadvertently influence girls’ lack of interest in science by responding differently to sons and daughters. Although boys and girls are equally likely to ask science questions, parents are more likely to explain scientific concepts to sons than to daughters, and this is true of both mothers and fathers.[4] Research also shows that a child’s gender influences parental use of science-related “teaching” language. Fathers in particular tend to use more cognitively-demanding language during science activities (e.g., explaining causes, asking conceptual questions, using scientific vocabulary) with sons than with daughters.[5]
Parental use of teaching language has been shown to increase children’s conceptual understanding in the domain of science. (...) Parents (especially mothers) encourage boys more than girls to participate in out-of-school science activities, such as playing with a chemistry set or a microscope. Science materials (e.g., books, games, or toys) are purchased more often for boys than for girls. Parents of daughters are more likely to believe that their child is not interested in science or that science is difficult for their child than parents of sons.
Source: http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Reports/LessonsInLearning/LinL20071101_Gender_differences_in_science.htm?Language=EN, My emphasis added

The Wage Gap is a myth. Women make different choices, and those choices affect how they work

As the trend for women to have kids simply because they want them without the inconvenience of having a relationship with a man, my sons will increasingly find that there are more women with kid(s) from previous "relationships".

Hmmm, the endless posts about the war against marriage, led by men, have now turned in to women not wanting to be bothered with a relationship? Really?

You think it's so much easier to use a man & parent alone in an effort to collect a few dollars?

You, the same man who professes that he helped with housework but left the most important job, child rearing, to a mere woman?

looking at the stats, a rather large percentage of kids born are to women who are not married or in a relationship.

Women are choosing, more and more, to have kids without men involved.

but listening to all the single mothers here they're gonna have kids no matter what...

Well, sweetums, looking at the stats, a rather large percenage of kids born are to women who are not married or in a relationship. Women are choosing, more and more, to have kids without men involved.

I don't know from personal experience, but listening to all the single mothers here they're gonna have kids no matter what, the kids are the bestest thing ever, and the moms really do like to collect as much as they can from men when they can.

Hu??!? And how do you conclude the later with the former?

I dare to say that if a rather large percentage of kids are born to women who aren't married nor in a relationship, it certainly isn't because the mother was the only one to make choices. Surely you can agree to this?

Behind each baby there is a man and a woman who had sex.
Aren't BOTH consenting adults responsible here?

'Cause, Einstein, only women can choose to bring a kid into the world...

Nope.... ever heard of a sperm bank, Einstein?

I've met many women who choose Fate as their BC of choice.

I've met a lot of really stupid men who choose to believe a woman about her BC and who then don't take personal responsibility for their sperm.

Since you never did it, though, how would you know how onerous & difficult it is?

Ohhhh I see. You really have a gift for shooting yourself in your own foot.

Can you make it clear for us, then - do you believe that men don't have any responsibility into "bringing that kid into the world" only because women's decision not to abort comes in as a second step?

Oh, so you are telling me that the majority of your statistics come from women who used sperm bank, Sherlock

Behind each baby there is a man and a woman who had sex.