Phyllis Schlafly opposes efforts to close the pay gap between men and women. That should come as no surprise. What comes as a shocker, though, is why she opposes it. In an op-ed for The Christian Post, the nation's original loathsome right-wing granny argues that a bigger pay gap between men and women is necessary so women won't have as hard a time finding a boyfriend or husband.
While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.
Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate.
Obviously, I'm not saying women won't date or marry a lower-earning men, only that they probably prefer not to. If a higher-earning man is not available, many women are more likely not to marry at all.
Schlafly's "evidence"? In two demographics where the pay gap has all but vanished--blacks and millennials--the rate of marriage has fallen the fastest. Never mind that there could be other factors at play. Incredibly, she also cites this as an argument for
raising the pay gap, saying that the best way to improve women's economic standing is to improve job prospects for men--a sort of sexual "trickle-down." Yeah, that'll help the rebranding effort--suggest that women can't get ahead unless they're more dependent on their men.