A pharmacy in New york City has imposed a policy that blatantly discriminates against customers of the male gender. This “man tax” is a 7% price hike designed to help combat the “wage gap” that so many feminists claim is indicative of the systemic oppression of women. The owner of the store, Jolie Alony claimed “We thought it’d be a great idea with all the political things going on—with Clinton being such a woman and the other guy and his womanizing.” She continued “we wanted to share that women deserve to get a break, and men deserve to be charged 7 percent more. Women are spending more in general and we make less, so we deserve to have a break.”
Aside from the obvious sexism that comes along with such a business decision, there are a few logistical issues with the wage gap she claims to be fighting. Namely, wage inequality doesn’t exist. There isn’t a single shred of evidence that women are paid 22% less than their male counterparts. We’re talking about businesses here, one of the main priorities of an establishment designed to make money is to cut costs wherever possible, and maximize profit.
Let’s take a look at the myth that is the pay gap. It has been claimed that women are paid 78 cents on the dollar, and must pay 22% out of every paycheck just because they are women. How did they come to these figures? Well, thanks to the White House and many others who manipulate these statistics, many young women are led to believe that they are getting the raw end of the deal.
The 78 cents on the dollar statistic completely ignores many variables that affect the pay of people of both genders. These variables include experience, education, time on the job, maternity leave, sick leave, these will all have a certain effect on how much money is made per paycheck. If those variables were taken into consideration, the adjusted numbers for average pay would be much more realistic than the false statistics that people like Hillary Clinton push.
In a Slate article from 2013, Hanna Rosin wrote: “The official Bureau of Labor Department statistics show that the median earnings of full-time female workers is 77 percent of the median earnings of full-time male workers. But that is very different than ‘77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.’ The latter gives the impression that a man and a woman standing next to each other doing the same job for the same number of hours get paid different salaries. That’s not at all the case. ‘Full time’ officially means 35 hours, but men work more hours than women. That’s the first problem: We could be comparing men working 40 hours to women working 35.”
According to her, a much more fair way to assess the “wage gap” would be to compare earnings based on a weekly basis, rather than an annual one. This removes a lot of variables that could lead to less hours, or absent days over the course of the year. Essentially, if a man and a woman worked the same entry level job, for the same amount of hours, on the same days for an entire week, you would find that the paychecks would come to be the same.
So, not only is Jolie Alony’s decision to impose a “man tax” illegal, and a clear case of discrimination, but there is no factual basis to back up her claim that women make less than men. You can’t fix what isn’t broken, and you can’t punish an entire demographic of customers based purely off of inflated statistics. This is as disgusting as imposing a “black people tax” because you heard from somewhere that they steal more often, which obviously isn’t true. Asserting your opinion as fact does not make your opinion a fact, that’s just how things work.