Wage Discrimination Versus Totalitarianism

[Ginkgo]

If the press release Williams has cited only deals with gender wage inequality and mentions nothing about youth inequality then Williams has a strawman. If on the other hand there is additional evidence in the press release in respect to comparative youth wage inequality then I stand corrected.

No, I'm sorry, you stand corrected, period.

LOL Good one Bob.

[Ginkgo]

Bob, I googled the press releases in relation to Obama declaring zero tolerance in relation to the gender wage disparity. No articled cited has any reference to youth wages compared to adult wages. Unless, you can find something there is a high probability Williams has a strawman.

[bobevenson]

Again, you don't seem to understand the point of Williams' article. Wage disparities exist across the board, not just for gender, but for age, race, religion, disability, etc., etc., etc., and there are reasons for these disparities. Williams mentions age, but he could have mentioned all the others. The point is that Obama singling out just gender is disingenuous to say the least. Why do you insist on beating a dead horse?

[Ginkgo]

Again, you don't seem to understand the point of Williams' article. Wage disparities exist across the board, not just for gender, but for age, race, religion, disability, etc., etc., etc., and there are reasons for these disparities. Williams mentions age, but he could have mentioned all the others. The point is that Obama singling out just gender is disingenuous to say the least. Why do you insist on beating a dead horse?

I understand the point of Williams' article and in the end what he says probably will come true. But that changes nothing in relation to my straw man observation.

Why am I beating this dead horse? Because I like precision when it comes to formulating an argument.

[bobevenson]

Again, you don't seem to understand the point of Williams' article. Wage disparities exist across the board, not just for gender, but for age, race, religion, disability, etc., etc., etc., and there are reasons for these disparities. Williams mentions age, but he could have mentioned all the others. The point is that Obama singling out just gender is disingenuous to say the least. Why do you insist on beating a dead horse?

I understand the point of Williams' article and in the end what he says probably will come true. But that changes nothing in relation to my straw man observation.

Why am I beating this dead horse? Because I like precision when it comes to formulating an argument.

I'm afraid you have an erroneous interpretation of a straw-man argument, and I defy you to produce an authoritative disclaimer.

[Ginkgo]

edit. I just found the William's link. I will read it and get back.

[bobevenson]

edit. I just found the William's link. I will read it and get back.

The link doesn't matter, there is nothing straw-man about his argument.

[Ginkgo]

edit. I just found the William's link. I will read it and get back.

The link doesn't matter, there is nothing straw-man about his argument.

Ok then.

From wikipedia in relation to the fallacy in question:

A Straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of the original topic of the argument. To be successful, a straw man requires that the audience be IGNORANT and UNINFORMED of the original topic.

Williams in the first sentence writes:

"President Obama Vows Zero Tolerance on Gender Wage Gap", read one headline. Another read, "Women Still Earned 77 cents on Men's Dollar in 2012"

Williams only ever gives us the headlines in relation to the original text. We are left ignorant and uninformed in relation to the actual content of the Obama statements.

It is fair enough for Williams to give his interpretation of what Obama is actually saying, but he needs to give us the relevant sections, or a complete copy of the transcript in order to back up his argument. Doing this is important from the point of view of the reader because it also allows them to also make a judgement as well, a.k.a. being informed as well.

As an academic Williams should know this.

[Wyman]

Williams is just making the point, with the age discrimination analogy, that the 77 percent gap does not take into account certain factors that account for the gap besides gender (as the age gap doesn't take into account the obvious gap in experience and corresponding skills associated with age). I have heard liberals and conservatives argue this issue endlessly and it is pointless unless an agreement is reached on the factual issues - do the studies that show a gap adequately take into account relevant factors such as women taking off more time for pregnancy or working less hours as men for a variety of reasons.

But that is all factual dispute and to argue facts is pointless unless you have the study in front of you.