I think mortality/danger is an interesting axis:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/187078/occupational-inju...

If, by being a man, you are 10x more likely to die from your job, and you are 10x more likely to die younger, should society compensate for your fewer hours lived?

If no, why would society decide to undervalue males?

The question is why those careers earn less money. Your assertion is that the careers men choose are more dangerous, so those careers earn more. My question is, are dangerous careers well paid?

Here are the totals for occupational deaths: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cfoi.t03.htm

~25% for Transportation and material moving occupations

~20% for Construction

~10% for Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations

~1.5% for Business, Finance, Computers, Math, Engineering, and Legal

I believe all the ones you listed would fall above the median salary of about $50k.

My point wasn't that all the specified careers were above the median salary, my point was that the most dangerous jobs don't seem to be the best paid jobs. The original question was

> But then why do those careers earn less money?

and the follow up was

> If, by being a man, you are 10x more likely to die from your job, and you are 10x more likely to die younger, should society compensate for your fewer hours lived?

which I tried to answer with looking at which jobs killed more people. It doesn't look to me like the big money is in jobs which kill more people

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseeb3a.htm

-----

Transportation: $25.71/hr ~= $51k/yr

Construction: $32.24/hr ~= $64k/yr

Repair and Maintenance: $25.26/hr ~= $51k/yr

------

Professional and Business: $35.82/hr ~= $71k/yr

Financial: $39.67/hr ~= $79k/yr

Computer systems design and related services: $50.60/hr ~= $101k/yr

Legal services: $46.34/hr ~= $93k/yr

-------

That said, I think the commenter I was responding to was trying to change the subject

> If no, why would society decide to undervalue males?

Regardless of the answer to their question, the topic would then be on-the-job deaths instead of the gender wage gap. I chose to answer the part of the question relevant to the gender wage gap.

You need to compare jobs you can get with same qualifications, of course. That's why we don't compare surgeons with janitors.

Of course, most gender pay gap comparison do in fact compare surgeons with kindergarten teachers, but that seems done intentionally to mislead.

Many of those jobs produce fewer tangible outputs, are government jobs, non-profit, or otherwise do not focus on maximizing profit. Positions like teachers, social workers, etc are seen as cost centers, not revenue centers. They are necessary jobs and perform valuable societal functions, but they are supported through other revenues which were not a direct product of their job. As for why one gender chooses those jobs more than others, there are a variety of factors. One of the leading ones is that some people are more likely to choose work that is meaningful over just a dollar amount. Studies show that isn't just based on gender, but also in the some minority groups.

> Why is it that it just so happens that every job that is more likely for women to work also is paid less?

I am quite confident this is not true, in the broad way you have stated it.

There are many categories of jobs with a greater proportion of women, that pay higher than many categories of jobs with a greater proportion of men.

That's not true. Obstetricians are mostly women and are better paid (on average) than internal medicine, which is mostly men. There are other examples.

If you assume men are willing to give up more (life span, time, stress, risk) for money than women, it has an amazing amount of explanatory power.