Scientific Blackpill (Supplemental): Difference between revisions

===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: normal;" id="High_potential_women_earn_higher_premiums_in_the_workplace_than_.22high_potential.22_men.2C_but_don.27t_report_higher_pay_satisfaction">High potential women earn higher premiums in the workplace than "high potential" men, but don't report higher pay satisfaction</span>===

<div class="navbar" style="padding-left: 4px; margin-top: 3px; background: #EAEAEA; color: #555; border-top: 2px solid #444; border-bottom: 1px solid #444; font-size: 13px">[[#High_potential_women_earn_higher_premiums_in_the_workplace_than_.22high_potential.22_men.2C_but_don.27t_report_higher_pay_satisfaction|permalink]] | [[#tocFeminism|category: Feminism]] | [[#tocHigh_potential_women_earn_higher_premiums_in_the_workplace_than_.22high_potential.22_men.2C_but_don.27t_report_higher_pay_satisfaction|table of contents]]</div>

Abstract from the paper: In this constructive replication, we revisit a provocative study by Leslie, Manchester, and Dahm (2017). They found that gender and being designated a high‐potential employee interacted in accounting for pay and that this resulted in a reversal in the commonly observed gender pay gap favoring men. Our primary aim was to examine important boundary conditions associated with their work by (a) conducting a study using a sample that would better generalize across industries and to individuals who aspire to reach senior management, (b) adding critical control variables to the statistical models used in the pay equation, and (c) by introducing a different conceptualization of the high‐potential construct. Also, to better understand the consequences of their study, we considered an additional dependent variable that addressed pay satisfaction. Even after making these model additions, the gender by high‐potential interaction term was significant—ruling out four plausible third‐variable explanations for the Leslie et al. finding. Moreover, these confirming results were observed using a sample that represented individuals employed in a wide range of industries, who had the educational backgrounds, career histories, and motivational states typically required of candidates competing for senior executive roles. Furthermore, high‐potential women did not report higher levels of pay satisfaction, suggesting that high‐potential women did not perceive their pay premium to be an inequitable advantage and that there may be limited positive return associated with using a pay premium to retain high‐potential talent.

===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: normal;" id="Women_report_lower_job_satisfaction_working_under_a_female_boss.2C_men_don.27t">Women report lower job satisfaction working under a female boss, men don't</span>===

<div class="navbar" style="padding-left: 4px; margin-top: 3px; background: #EAEAEA; color: #555; border-top: 2px solid #444; border-bottom: 1px solid #444; font-size: 13px">[[#Women_report_lower_job_satisfaction_working_under_a_female_boss.2C_men_don.27t|permalink]] | [[#tocFeminism|category: Feminism]] | [[#tocWomen_report_lower_job_satisfaction_working_under_a_female_boss.2C_men_don.27t|table of contents]]</div>

Abstract from the paper: The participation of women in the labor force has grown significantly over the past 50 years, and with this, women are increasingly holding managerial and supervisory positions. Yet little is known about how female supervisors impact employee well-being. Using two distinct datasets of US workers, we provide previously undocumented evidence that women are less satisfied with their jobs when they have a female boss. Male job satisfaction, by contrast, is unaffected. Crucially our study is able to control for individual worker fixed effects and to identify the impact of a change in supervisor gender on worker well-being without other alterations in the worker's job.

===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: normal;" id="Women_were_historically_mainly_involved_in_cooking_and_they_never_lead_a_country">Women were historically mainly involved in cooking and they never lead a country</span>===

<div class="navbar" style="padding-left: 4px; margin-top: 3px; background: #EAEAEA; color: #555; border-top: 2px solid #444; border-bottom: 1px solid #444; font-size: 13px">[[#Women_were_historically_mainly_involved_in_cooking_and_they_never_lead_a_country|permalink]] | [[#tocFeminism|category: Feminism]] | [[#tocWomen_were_historically_mainly_involved_in_cooking_and_they_never_lead_a_country|table of contents]]</div>

Kinship and Gender (2010), anthropologist Linda Stone writes that, “Today anthropologists generally agree that cases of true matriarchy do not exist in human society, and that they most probably never have.”