Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Early Addition
Ladies, it's time to throw your hat in the air a la Mary Tyler Moore: It turns out that young women are earning more than young men in cities like New York, Chicago, Boston, Dallas and Los Angeles.
Apparently women between 21 and 30, of all income levels, are earning 117% of men's wages, according to analysis by Queens College demographer Andrew Beveridge for Gotham Gazette. The latest census data shows that women in their 20s are making a median wage of $35,653, while the median for men is $30,560. The NY Times reports:
In 2005, 53 percent of women in their 20s working in New York were college graduates, compared with only 38 percent of men of that age. And many of those women are not marrying right after college, leaving them freer to focus on building careers, experts said.Another interesting fact:- Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens women in their 20s make more than same-aged men in those borough; SI women in their 20s make the same as the men, while Manhattan women make slightly more.“Citified college-women are more likely to be nonmarried and childless, compared with their suburban sisters, so they can and do devote themselves to their careers,” said Andrew Hacker, a Queens College sociologist and the author of “Mismatch: The Growing Gulf Between Men and Women.”
However, it's unclear whether the trend holds out when women become older, as they may hit the glass ceiling or take time off to raise families. And then there are industries where women are in the minority, like finance. And there's bad news for men: Real wages for males have been moving backwards, when adjusted for inflation.
You can read a March 2007 article by Beveridge that has more details about incomes of men and women, with different age breaks and marital status, at Gotham Gazette. And the NY Times article also addresses that other question, when you think about the number of single women in New York. Professer Hacker said, "When New York college women say there are few eligible men around, they’re right if they mean they’ll only settle for someone with an education akin to their own."
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
it would of eventually happen. girls do better in schools than guys. guys while in school only think of pussy.
I think you mean 17% more than men. Not 117%.
well 117% technically works but whatever.
B.S. Let's see them do that city with college educated versus non-college educated men and women. I'd be shocked if college educated women earned more than college educated men, which is the real glass ceiling to worry about.
Professer Hacker said, "When New York college women say there are few eligible men around, they’re right if they mean they’ll only settle for someone with an education akin to their own."
Which is not necessarily good news if you're a well-educated single man. Many women, especially in cities, only want so-called "Alpha males." Men who happen to be on the nerdy side, for example those who would rather go to a Star Trek convention than to an NFL game, aren't going to find many women interested in them, even if they are well-educated and have good jobs. Nerdiness is by far the biggest drawback for a man when it comes to relationships. Worse than being overweight, short or bald; worse than being an underachiever slacker type; worse, in some cases, than having an angry domineering personality.
Poor Peter is having trouble with the ladies.
Damn Sexism
Its all a result of blatant prejudice tv shows like sex in the city
Brainwashed an entire generation
pshh, i like nerds!
"It turns out that young women are earning are making more than young men in cities like New York..."
I guess the grammar issues are so aggravating because very often they are in the first sentence or paragraph.
For non-journalists, this is your lede paragraph -- the most important one. It's supposed to summarize and also hook the reader. The lede in this story is saying, "read on if you want to read another sloppy, quickly-assembled post"
For more of Andrew Beveridge's reporting on this topic in Gotham Gazette, go here. This column, which appeared in June, includes charts showig how real wages for young women have increased over the pastdecades while young men have seen their wages fall (in real dollars).
This survey is bull! Lets compare non-college educated females vs. same males and you will see males make more. And then compare the college educated females and male and males will make MUCH more. Yes there's a lot more females with college education for some reason but they do not predominate in higher position which men excel at. Yes if you need an HR manager it will be a woman , if you need a payroll manager it will be a woman, if you need a PR manager it will be a woman. But if you need a operations manager its almost always a man, and if you need a sales/IT/maintenance/ etc etc it will be a man. So just because there are more position available for woman in cities doesn't mean they are better than men
the cosmetics/shoe/sex in the city stereotype is NOT changing females position in society it is turning back the clock and will result in female holding less responsible positions
Time to get a sugar mama!
Interesting the number 35 as in the 35K salary is the same number when single women start having difficulties in getting pregnant.
It's not interesting it's a random coincidence.
Bah vast majority of 20-25 year old women that live in the city make 40K and have their parents pay for $1500+/mo apartment.
That's because men are drunks and drug addicts.
How much of that money comes from their paycheck and how much comes from daddy?
Women Will Have to Be Less Picky, or Become Better Friends with Mr. Vibrator
Some of them, though, have already resigned themselves to a life with the Hitachi Magic Wand and Cupcakes from Magnolia.
Its good to be a girl, it seems.
guest #15, The reason why their parents are paying for their apts is so that they can meet men and ostensibly get married, well eventually. You gotta be in it to win it. See it all the time, hell I lived it. So what? I'm married with a kid now.
Peter, I think you're WRONG and trapped in some early '80s movie timewarp. Women in the city dislike self absorbed men of any stripe, be it organized sports or Star Trek. That said, it's logical that given the cost of living, no man or woman really wants to deal with the potential financial strain in the event marriage and kids are in the cards. Which is the real reason why women put off having kids.
I've been saying this for years: the income gap that the so-called experts have been touting for years is complete crap at least for the Gen X and younger set. Education has been so slanted toward girls and women that these results should have been picked up on years ago. The only question is what happens to these women when they get older. I have no doubt that if they stay on the career path they have chosen that in 20 years you will see women making up 50% of corporate boards and corner office suites. That we haven't seen them in great numbers now simply reflects where the state of education was in the 1980s and 1970s. How many women were earning MBAs at Wharton in 1980? That's a better predicter of how many women CEOs there should be today. Most CEOs are around 50 years old and earned their degrees 20 years before getting tapped for the top job. On the other hand, if these women drop out of the workforce to have kids then they will fall behind - the same thing that would happen if a man didn't put in the hours to get to the top.
Poor Peter is having trouble with the ladies
Lame comeback, Alex. Take a look around this city. Women are in it for the money. Plenty of the most educated 20-something females in New York would chuck it all for a Managing Director at an investment bank. Plenty of Ivy League degrees are being wasted on people that contribute nothing to society other than sitting on the board of a museum or hospital.
right on... the "daddy's little princess syndrome" skews the results towards women.
[1] wrote:
What do you mean "while in school"?Speaking of which - hey [8], call me! Hehe.
CORRECTION: The NYT article says that women in Manhattan make slightly LESS than men, not more!
Then why do men still have to pay for everything on dates?
25. Because all women are whores, do'h.
Peter: you are overlooking the fact that there are 186,000 MORE single women than single men in NYC. I don't think women can afford to be that picky if they want to get with a man.
The rest of you "guest" commenters clearly have issues, though. "Women are in it for the money"? "All women are whores?" Pretty sad.
[21] If you're having trouble finding a woman not in it for the money in a city of 8 million, you need to start rethinking your approach.
"Worse than being overweight, short or bald"
sorry peter, i've seen women swoon over tall losers with no personality.
Gwinny: y don't u answer #25's question: "Then why do men still have to pay for everything on dates?"
This shouldn't be news to anyone, a good-looking young woman can come to a city and get a job as waitress or bartender fairly easily, and then earn better than minimum wage, while a young man would be stuck working something worse. Nothing to be bitter about, men sort of make up for it later in life as the ladies drop out to take care of the kiddies.
Don't worry guys. These career women always turn into bitter old cat loving ladies when they retire.
They regret putting a career in front of family, and bitterly act out by yelling at the neighborhood children, who are only playing and enjoying life with their friends.
When they die, their bodies end up unclaimed at the local morgue, and either ends up in an unmarked grave, or donated to a medical school.
zodak: enlightened women don't make the men pay for everything on dates. When I am dating someone, sometimes he treats, and sometimes I do.