Advocates for women’s “pay equity” no doubt strongly support the Age Discrimination In Employment Act. Without it, they may argue, employers, who seek the cheapest labor possible, would replace their older employees with younger ones at lower wages in the same jobs. Yet these same advocates must think employers suddenly don’t care about cheap labor when it comes to paying men more than women in the same jobs. In sum, the advocates believe employers would fire older workers and hire only young ones to save money, but will not fire men and hire only women to save money.

So what accounts for the gender wage gap?

Despite women’s 40-year-old demand for equal wages, millions of women as wives still choose to earn no wages at all. How can they afford to do this while in many cases living lives of luxury in affluent neighborhoods? Any teenager knows how: “They are supported by their husband!”

If millions of stay-at-home wives can work (at home) for no wages at all and can live as well off as their employed husbands, millions more can work for low wages, can refuse to work overtime, can refuse promotions, can take more unpaid days off … all because their husbands support them.

Men’s willingness to support their wives is the true cause of women’s 77 cents to men’s dollar.

To many, the legislation aimed at closing the sexes’ wage gap is absurd. But if you want absurd legislation that would really work, simply prohibit men from supporting women. The wage gap would close almost overnight!

Condensed from “A Male Matters Response to the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act” at http://tinyurl.com/pvbrcu