The wage gap has often been debunked quite thoroughly before and may I add by far more scholarly writers than I.

Having said that - I would like to concentrate on why I think that this old "whack a mole" myth keeps raising it's head - this is an important point and concerns the actual foundation upon which 'mainstream' feminism is built upon (esp. the genderradical flavours).

The issue is the major false premise of 'modern' feminism "All behavioural differences between the sexes is caused by socialisation alone". This is in effect stating that wherever an issue can be bent or twisted into an accusatory dialogue about 'discrimination' then the 'solution' to that issue must be resolved by changes in social engineering because there is no other recourse and nothing else need be heeded because nature does not play a significant role in any of these issues.

This is the basis for the endless streeam of intellectrtual frauds being perpetrated against the 'masses'. Of course such propagandists now have a growing problem on their hands i.e. the 'masses' are not so dependent anymore on a mainstream media that had become largely cowed by 'political correctness'

and the radicalgender feminist lobby. The internet has 'empowered' the man and woman on the street with a right of reply that the 'traditional media' only offered in a highly watered down and tightly controlled (moderated if you will)outlet (i.e. letters to the editor - that was it for most part!!).

So in effect what we are now waiting for is the political elite to wake up to the fact that if they want to gauge public consensus then they had better find ways to litmus test the internet as failure to do so will only proliferate the 'protest vote' as it already has done here in the UK where I reside.

If those well known 'egalitarians' @ N.O.W. think Joe Biden is an excellent choice then all MEN beware in fact let me extend that to all heterosexuals. Biden is a panderer in chief to this bunch of lesbian radical Marxist feminists. The guys and gals and this forum are pretty smart folks on the whole so I will let you get googling to do your own homework. Of course if you are in favour of undermining marriage, the nuclear family whilst praising or promoting same sex 'marriage' then of course you will be completely blinded to what I talking about. You will also be the kind of moron that fails to see the sexism say in an act costing billions of taxpayers money entitled the Violence Against WOMEN Act...

Has the journalist who wrote this article never heard the story of the boy who cried wolf?

Do any of you guys care about the way even the phrase 'mens rights' has almost become a dirty word - certainly politicians like Obama and Biden treat it that way! You guys really need to wake up and get educated on what is really going on.

You could start by reading this and then I'll leave it up to you on whether you decide to 'grow a pair' or not:

Will YOU Elect GynObama & VAWA Joe?

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/08/23/will-you-elect-gynobama-vawa-joe-marc-h-rudov/

thusly and I quote:

Watching the RNC, my girlfriend- who has not been all that familiar with politics (at least not in the past!), noticed how the rhetoric and audience bore a strong resemblance to that of German National Socialist party meetings and rallies...

You shouldn't hang around with girlfriends who lie about their prior familiarity with politics or are that familiar with Nazi meetings. Ironically I noticed that those with little piggy eyes filled with hatred seemed far more in evidence in the Democratic convention than the republican - as for flag waving I didn't notice a shortage of that in the Dems convention either!

How you can talk about 'pro-lifers' using 'euphemisms' even whilst you use the terms 'pro-choice' to indicate that you support ABORTION ON DEMAND is a hypocrisy so breathtaking that it almost leaves me speechless!

Also for YOUR information I am also PRO-LIFE but I am not a 'fundy' or indeed a follower of ANY religion (I am an agnostic humanist). I also prefer jaw jaw to war war, do NOT believe in sexual abstinence for myself (but support others rights to so choose if they want), I DO believe in sex education. What I do object to is the use of abortion as a kind of late form of 'contraception' I think that is morally and ethically repugnant - that said in cases of rape and where a mothers life would be in significant danger if she carried to term then choice should be afforded then. Stereotype all you like just don't include me in them and don't be such a *ucking hypocrite either.

It surely must be SEXISM because here comes a winsome potential female VP and most democrats are competing with each other to hurl misogynistic insults at her - go figure!!! :(

Sarah is like a Pitbull and the fury and false mockery she arouses in the average pro radical feminist Salon reader is a pleasure to observe. It is good that your world view gets challenged but the sad thing is that because you spend so much time in an insulated world away from such opposing world views you are unable to respond rationally. I find it ironically amusing that the clique that has a fond penchant for using buzz words like 'women's rights' has such a narrow view of such that it likely excludes at least 50% of US women when it comes to how such pro radfems define it. It seems that the class that most likes to rail against 'stereotypes' is in fact the group most guilty of doing just that.

Still... ***"I LOVE the smell of irony in the morning!"

*** = A Puke A Lips Now. ;-)