"Study": US mothers deserve $134,121 in salary

[Gerard Velthuis]

"US mothers deserve $134,121 in salary"

It just hit me how feminists could use this figure to their advantage, and probably are / will

Think about a divorce case.
In divorces these figures will be used to show that the woman is entitled to at least 50% of the assets of a couple. Probably more because then they would compare it with the man's income and than they could show the woman's potential income is much higher, and actually deserves even more than the man.
But in all fairness, she will just take half!

THIS is how these figures will be used by feminists!

[Galt]

THIS is how these figures will be used to feminists!

Yeah ... well ... not if you don't marry them.

But it's probably a good excuse: Honey, I just can't afford you.

[Niall]

I was just discussing this with one of my neighbours. She said that they publish these kinds of "studies" every year, and always at about the same time. The last one she said, consisted of a poll showing that stay at homes do about 200 hours worth of work every week, which I find strange considering there are only 168 hours in a week.

And these studies always seem to be published within a few days of Mother's Day. An amazing coincidence, don't you think?

[Sir Jessy of Anti]

Guilt works.

[Somebody else]

...stay at homes do about 200 hours worth of work every week, which I find strange considering there are only 168 hours in a week.

It's that "multi-tasking" thing they're capable of. Doing two things at the same time counts for double time.

[realman]

"200 hours worth of work every week, which I find strange considering there are only 168 hours in a week. "

Multi-tasking? I thought it was the "new math".

And mostly "multi-tasking" seems liek what they call it when they suck at everything or when they're doing a losuy at job at 10 things at the same time. I think there is such a thing as "multi-tasking", but men can do it too and women are NOT half as good at it as they think.

Lets see though, husbands/dads are (on average, more or less, etc.):

-auto mechanic

-landscaper

-contractor

-plumber

-janitor

-mediator

-manager

-coach (for dads)

-nanny (for dads)

-equipment operator

-technical help desk technician

-sanitation engineer

-engineer

-corrections officer (for dads)

-bodyguard

-chauffeur (usually even if both are going, hubby drives most of the time)

-bank teller (esp. if wife is a SAHM or "homemaker")

-accountant (at least in some cases)

-all of these are of course on top of the guy's REAL job (there are pretty darn few men who don't have one of these...)

I'm sure I missed a few, but the point is... okay, if women are worth $134k/yr for their jobs- how do the combined salaries of husbands and/or dads stack up?

[Somebody else]

Sorry, forgot to put the sarcasm tags around my post.

[Beste]

It seems like Salary.com has a sequel

What 's a Dad Worth

[BRIAN]

It seems like Salary.com has a sequel

What 's a Dad Worth

Aparently a dad is woth $9,000 les than a Mom. I knew that was coming, in fact that was the only reason I clicked the link. .

[johnnyp]

It seems like Salary.com has a sequel

What 's a Dad Worth

Aparently a dad is woth $9,000 les than a Mom. I knew that was coming, in fact that was the only reason I clicked the link. .

Oh - that is great - more BS to layer on top of the original BS.  We now have a BS layer cake - it may look pretty, but it still tastes like BS.

[Beste]

It is a BS study.

But at least a Salary.com is including dad in this now as well as mom.  Did you notice that if you add unpaid/paid hours of working dads, working mothers and SAHMs? It all adds to roughly 90+ hours (I don't know why the SAHD only does 80)

So much for the argument that working dads don't  equally share the workload. Even Salary.com are saying working dads do an equal amount of work within the family.

We all know that feminists were probably the reason that Salary.com did the BS study on women in the first place*.  But when Salary.com applied the same BS Study to men.  It came up with a result that I think feminists wouldn't like.


http://www.venuszine.com/stories/diy_resources/3034

Even though feminists also value the work of stay-at-home moms, we just can't win with IWF. The organization's vice president of policy Carrie Lukas is opposed to the idea of calculating the salary a stay-at-home mom would earn if she were paid for her work -- which is something that's been done to illustrate the point that full-time moms do valuable work, too. According to her mother's day essay, "Life is payment enough" for women who gave up careers to be caregivers.

*Its not exactly proof. But I think Ann did slip up here while attacking the  IWF..  If you read Carrie Lukas article.  She was critical of Salary.coms and the idea of calculating a salary for SAHMs,  but she doesn't directly attribute this idea to feminists. Actually.  She doesn't even mention feminists.  Since Salary.com cannot be considered a feminist site. Why does Ann attribute the idea to feminists?

[gwallan]

Why does Ann attribute the idea to feminists?

While feminists may not be involved in, or commission, this "study" they are certainly responsible for the impetus and mind set that causes it to be done in the first place.