Mulligan

Laura Billings writes in today's Pioneer Press about the Augusta National Golf Course controversy.

Augusta doesn't admit women. Unlike a lot of Twin Cities' columnists, Billings does seem to notice that the free market will one day sort this all out:

I predict that once we have a critical mass of retired women corporate leaders with good handicaps and $50,000 for membership fees, the gates to Augusta will swing right open...

...or if they don't, those female executives will flock to a club that's more amenable to them, and the male-only club will languish...

But whatever - it's rare that a Twin Cities media pundit actually grasps the inherent leveling influence of the market. Kudos to Ms. Billings for doing something Doug Grow never has...

However, the path she takes to get to that realization is crowded with strawmen.

The state's demographer reported that even though Minnesota has the highest percentage of working mothers in the country, and even though we are home to such women-friendly companies as General Mills, working women here still make only 73 cents for every dollar earned by a man.

That's a wage gap that has been narrowed by only 6 cents since 1990. According to the findings of the 2000 census, women who work full time still earn an average of $10,600 less than men.

The census - and Billings - miss or gloss over the reasons for this; it lumps type-a 80-hour-per-week stockbrokers together with people with high school diplomas who raised five kids and now work 15 hours a week at Fashion Bug. It compares apples and axles.

Simple fact - if you compare males and females with the same education, time on the job and qualifications, pay inequity between the sexes is a myth. The funny part is, Billings comes close to realizing this:

Interestingly, the same inequity is not seen in the pay stubs received by the 200,000 men and women who work for local and state government.

Bingo. State workers are at least in a similar group - people with roughly (very roughly) comparable education, background and training.

But in the real world, women take time off to have children. They also frequently take time off to raise them - a very rare thing for men in our society. It doesn't go into a paycheck, sure. It's a part of life that's not only as important when all is said and done - it's something men are often the worse off for missing.

Moreover, many areas of academia and our schools seem to be overcompensating, with boys and men being shorted in many key ways. I say this as a guy who's spent a lot of time at home raising kids.

I'd love to see a columnist at least try to recognize the complexity of comparing men (who tend to start work when their education is done, and work nearly 'til death) and women (who tend to short their education to get into relationships and have children, take time to raise them, and enter or re-enter the workforce late), and add in some of the intangibles that accompany those differences.

Posted by Mitch at November 26, 2002 01:09 PM