Men should wear make-up

Secretly, many do.

https://www.indy100.com/article/women-wear-makeup-work-office-paid-more-money-8386616

Looking healthier makes you more money.

Make-up helps you look healthier.

Being healthier would help too.

I had to use this gif.

Nice girls finish last (earn less)

https://www.aftau.org/news-page-business–management?=&storyid4701=2305&ncs4701=3

It’s to be expected on a level of Duh that forcing women to directly engage in competition with men in the workforce would produce some social changes.

At the very least, modern workers weigh more and age faster (cortisol).

This applies to both sexes. Perhaps women were the fairer sex because the home environment is quieter (cortisol can be triggered by loud noise, although a home can be equally or more busy depending on the industry compared).

The structure rewards masculinity at work. Women need to be. However, even this isn’t enough.

If you’re doing the same work, you should be paid the same. Basic contract law, nothing to do with sex.

Social masculinity is often contextual. As in, plenty of stern women at work soften up in their personal lives. Men compartmentalize too, dating back to the clinical detachment of doctors and surgeons. This is healthy.

I’ve found kindness is frequently punished as we go by an American system (loud, annoying, rude).

There is some evidence for a masculinity wage gap but yes, also a gender/sex-based one.

However, it does varies by industry, like the feminists refuse to accept.

According to the researchers, the same goes for dominant men versus their more conciliatory male counterparts — but even dominant women earn far less than all of their male colleagues, dominant or otherwise.

STEM degrees are the only ones worth getting, says Math

article

The big picture. Over their lifetimes, graduates with majors in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) can expect to earn far more than high school graduates with no college attendance, with an earnings premium of $1.5 million over and above the $1.73 million that high school graduates with no college attendance can expect to earn. Business majors do slightly worse than STEM majors, with a lifetime earnings premium of $1.4 million. Social scientists stake out the middle ground, earning $1.05 million more than noncollege high school graduates over a lifetime. Arts and humanities majors can expect to earn about $700,000 more, on average, than high school graduates with no college attendance.”

If they get a job after a liberal arts major. Big IF.

The worst STEM majors earn more than the best high school graduates. Those in the bottom quintile of ability who go on to major in STEM have lifetime earnings of about $2.3 million, compared to $2 million for high school graduates in the top quintile of ability; business majors do slightly worse than STEM majors. The worst social science majors earn about the same as the best high school graduates, and the worst arts and humanities majors earn less.”

Selection bias is real, but the earnings advantage persists.

trans. Idiots choose easy courses.

The ability premium (also known as the selection-bias correction) has declined over time.

because they let in anyone nowadays.

 

Dedication to studies at high school translates as success in life

study;

“High school grade point average (GPA) is a strong predictor of future earnings, a study concludes. The findings show that a one-point increase in high school GPA raises annual earnings in adulthood by around 12 percent for men and 14 percent for women. Although previous studies have found a relationship between higher levels of education and greater earnings, less is known about the association between academic performance in high school and income.”

How about time management? Memory retention and retrieval? Not procrastinating?