Bloggers from the US Chamber say equal pay is a fetish for money; women should choose the right partner at home.
ESCUSE ME!?!?!?
Wait, so this guy is saying that my wish for equal workplace treatment is nothing more than my “fetishism for money”. He’s also saying that maybe I didn’t choose the right home-lifestyle because I want equal pay.
But let’s back up for a second…
FETISH. any object, activity, etc, to which one is excessively or irrationally devoted.
Fetishization of money – is that like…
- Social conditioning to create attraction towards a person, place, or an object.
- Sexual fetishism, sexual attraction to objects, body parts or situations not conventionally viewed as being sexual in nature
- Commodity fetishism, a Marxist concept of valuation in capitalist markets
- Growth Fetish, the pursuit of economic growth in politics and economic theory as a universal cure for all society’s problems
And this, coming from the US Chamber of Commerce (you have to be f*cking kidding me) – THE entity whose entire existence is a result of both Commodity and Growth fetishism. For asking that we (women) be treated equally in the workplace in regards to pay, we are called fetishists by that gross entity in our government that represents “the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions…” We’re called “Scrooge-like” because we want to be matched, dollar-for-dollar based on skills and experience (instead of the $0.77 that we earn to every man’s dollar – granted that was 2008…).
And then there’s the implication that we chose the pay gap because we can bear offspring. According to this dipshit, our values involve childrearing and the right to stay home on maternity leave. And those values are often more important than making the same amount of money for the same job as a man who has the same experience and education.
But what about the countless women who don’t want to bring another being into this world? Why are we underpaid? And what about the countless men who choose to stay at home and be the primary parent? Why are they any different than stay at home mothers?
And the answer to all of that is sexistly simple – “Women… Let’s not overlook the obvious, immediate, power-of-the-individual solution: the right place to work and choose the right partner at home.”
Ohhh riiiight. So you’re telling me my choices – the choices I have are either selectively choosing jobs that cater to women or choosing a man to support my lifestyle? Cus that’s what I’m reading here. Those are my two choices – choose someone who will support me or choose career paths that are historically “women-friendly”. It’s not “choose legislation that would make it easier for working mothers to attend classes to further their careers”? it’s not “choose legislation that will make women couples equal to other couples so they have the basic rights provided that make childrearing easier”? No, says the Chamber, it’s choose to be barefoot in the kitchen, or choose to work for that $.23 cents less, because your values as a woman obviously lie in your ability to procreate, regardless of whether or not you actually want to. Cus that’s like… historic and shit.
Actually the “fetish” part is quoted by the Chamber of Commerce blogger and originally comes from someone named “Don Boudreaux” who used the phrase in a letter he wrote to the Los Angeles Times and also posted on his own blog.
I really think you’re overreacting. The CoC blog post has a point that is worth considering: that if we make our benchmark a statistic about income, we miss all kinds of other aspects of careers and compensation which affect people’s choices. I think the CoC blogger’s point (which, he doesn’t have much of one, mostly he’s rounding up various pieces on a theme) is that in the current workplace culture *anyone*, male or female, who takes time out of work or is unwilling to come in early and stay late, is hurting their career. So the explanation for fewer women in the boardrooms has to do with the fact that statistically, fewer women are willing to give up that much family time than men. Ultimately I think the blogger’s point is that the issue is or should be less about men vs women and more about family vs singles. Which you may disagree with, but isn’t exactly scandalous insofar as this argument has been around for a looooong time and isn’t that far off from some early twentieth century feminist ideas.
Good point, @Julie
I’m overreacting because I would like to get paid what dudes do for the same work with the same experience. This article makes it sound like women aren’t entitled to the same pay because we have the choice to bear children instead (and there are circumstances where that’s not considered a choice – whether it’s to have them or not). The problem here is that the theme he’s rounding up is really directed at women and the pay gap therein. You say “*anyone*, male or female, who takes time out of work… is hurting their career” yet I don’t see where he touches on stay-at-home dads for example – no, everything in the original post said women. And some of us choose not to have kids – but I don’t see my paycheck fatten because I dedicate my time to my career instead. And there are an increasing number of women who don’t want ‘em. And there are an increasing number of men who choose to be the primary parent. While the author seems to talk about equal access to opportunity, the original piece seems to be quite misdirected.
And I’ll note the author did post an update…
‘Update: The above post has been interpreted many different ways, few of which were intended. It is the belief of both the U.S. Chamber and I that women should have equal employment opportunity. In the above I was attempting, rather poorly, to point out that using the wage gap as the only measure of full equality provides an incomplete picture. The post was unclear in its message and I would like to apologize to those for whom it has caused offense. There was no intent to dismiss the challenges women face in the economy or diminish their substantial contributions.”
Of course, the kicker is that even if you chose a career-path that is historically ‘woman-friendly’ like say, being a librarian, you find that men are still making more. Not that I, uh, speak from experience or anything.