We all noticed it was just impoverished and uneducated young women blaming their incompetency on the wage gap and patriarchal influences, while really all other women in their age range had closed it to the extent that they are even making up for the women that drag the wages down

Its pretty impressive overall, but extremely funny watching some women be left behind and not even know it

Additionally, many women are not mimicking their competition in how the career ladder is approached.

There is a fear of coming across as too assertive within the organization she is already employed in.

What’s understated is that plenty of men come across as too cocky too and get passed up within the organization and at other organizations.

But some men, with the societal incentive to get ahead, continues aiming higher at other organizations with the same playbook, and enough of them find the organization that is indexing for that attitude.

I dont have a way to quantify this behavior by gender, I frequently see women not considering it though, overindexed on getting the promotion in the org and navigating that.

The competition doesn’t care about their perception at the place they are already employed, and are aiming on getting offers all the time for leverage.

> Women choose less lucrative careers

"Choose" is perhaps technically true, but misleading. Women are generally pressured out of lucrative careers.

Remember that programming started as a woman-dominated field (due to perceived proximity to typing as the fundamental skill), which is how so many pioneers and influential figures ended up being women (Grace Hopper, Margaret Hamilton). Women were ultimately pushed out as the field gained perceived prestige.

>Women choose less lucrative careers, leave the workforce more often to care for children, and care more about work-life balance.

Although the "choose" here needs to put into societal context. Do women naturally prefer less lucrative careers or has society reinforced that some less lucrative careers are in some way feminine while some more lucrative careers are masculine? Do women naturally want to leave the workforce and prioritize work-life balance or is that a response to society putting a majority of the parenting responsibility on their shoulders?

Isn’t it possible though, that if a role is gender stereotyped or if senior managers are a particular gender, that those of the other gender might need to prove themselves more to get the same job? That managers tend to hire people who appear to fit in, which usually means they are more like themselves, or those who already have the job? Also, it seems weird to suggest that only women have the failings you’ve noted, as men can also have the same shortcomings. In a way, this entire discussion is really highlighting that while some get hired, some do not, and somehow blames those who do not get hired as failures who should not get hired rather than as disadvantaged individuals due to circumstances partly or fully beyond their control.

An interesting point about choosing to leave the workforce to care for children is that re-entry into the workforce or even the ability to work and care for children is something a social net could be established to support. If we have networks that allow army recruits to enter the workforce after their service, we could do the same for parents, but instead social nets seem to devalue the act of raising children, maybe because they are driven too much by short term profit. Taxpayers accept that too, preferring tax breaks for families with children over support networks and job opportunities to re-enter the workforce full-time. One imagines it again is about hiring those like you - managers hiring individuals who worked from home are unlikely to have worked from home - they needed the time in industry to become experienced managers.

Edit: upon rereading my last comment, it is possible that work from home norms established under covid might be the best thing to happen to stay at home parents and their continued full time employment. This could then boost the number of relatively younger parents who could continue in the workforce after mat leave while also providing child care. But it’s not a replacement for better social nets and better social norms.

I think it's not an either-or problem, but a mix. Most of the effect does appear to be job choice, which is driven by degree choice, which is driven by earlier education / coaching by teachers, parents, etc.

However, In my experience my female colleagues doing similar things are generally under-compensated BUT, and this is a big BUT.. they also are less aggressive in asking for money. I have had this discussion with my wife, and every few years she does work up the energy to have the "give me more money" discussion with her boss, which is almost always followed by a best-in-years % raise at next compensation cycle.

I coach some of my former junior colleagues too and the women are generally paid a little bit less than their peer male coworkers, but also their reaction to this injustice is a lot less "I'm marching into my bosses office Monday morning and demanding a raise" than a male in the same seat would have.

And then yeah there's also some lingering biases.

If I had to make up some % allocation for pay differentials that I've seen, it's probably - 50% job choice / 40% career management / 10% bias. But who knows.

If I said most developers upset about the balance of equities between labor and company founders had chosen the less lucrative career of not being a founder, do you think that would resolve the concern for most people?

This is only true right after graduating and before giving birth. There is still a gender gap, but it's maternity induced.

See Kleven & Al, 2019.

Eh, that's an easy typo to make on a phone when you're used to autocorrect getting things right. Sometimes you miss when it doesn't.

That's not the incoherent part of GP, which is the part where they somehow seem to believe women are favored (?!) by current power structures and that favor will increase as those structures turn towards might-makes-right policies.

Likely it was "Increasing Awareness"; "Increasing awareness favors women, and men don't have the legal support to see justice."

They're probably commenting on the idea that there is a stronger push to get women into companies for quota requirements, where the same is not true for men, and any injustice in hiring for women is likely rectified whereas it is not likely to be met charitably for men.

I'm not sure what I personally believe here.

Some articles. [1][2]

For a while, this seemed to be associated with COVID, but it's continuing.

[1] https://www.edwardconard.com/macro-roundup/just-5-of-young-m...

[2] https://opa.hhs.gov/adolescent-health/physical-health-develo...