The most comprehensive gender pay studies ever done (by PayScale... you can find them online pretty easily) including over 500,000 datapoints indicate that women are paid the same as men when factors not related to gender are removed from the data.

Examples of non-gender factors are doctor's salaries vs nurses... women doctors make more than male nurses. And most people would say that is fair.

The highest paid racial gender group are Asian women, who earn 2% more than any other racial gender group. It is hard to imagine why, Asian women would be paid more for being "Asian" or "women", so most likely some other uncaptured variable explains the difference.

My daughter was a very good clarinetist. First, chair in not only her high school, but all state, and tri state symphonies. She received a merit scholarship to college, one of only two offered by the music department. She went on to get a master's degree in music performance. I wish she had not been so good. But gender did not hold her back.

After realizing she could not earn a good living in music, she went back to school became a nurse and is now working on her PhD in nurse anesthesia (paid for by her employer). Where the starting salary is $225,000 plus overtime and great benefits.

For some reason, I find consistently among woman, that income potential ranks relatively lower relative to career choice than with men. Perhaps the stereotype of men being "breadwinners" or "bringing home the bacon" continues to influence their choices. When those perceptions fade, perhaps the "gender" wage gap will narrow.

In addition, studies show men more likely to opt for voluntary overtime. When addressing generalizations that influence overall income, it is important to notice, that the generalizations do not apply to individuals but only to the group they belong to (in this case, men vs women). My hardest working, highest earning OB/GYN was a woman, when I ran a physician group with over 50 OB/GYNs. Clearly, it was not our compensation system producing the gender wage gap, it was the choices of the individuals.

This highlights two of the reasons noted in the study regarding why women earn less. This fits with surveys of doctors who ranked income potential higher among men than women regarding why they chose to become doctors.

If gender bias is occurring in hiring and promoting individuals, then I would support anything that eliminates gender bias including "blinding" gender and race from the process. At most larger companies I worked for the bias was against white men in order to achieve diversity goals. So, your experience is different than mine with regard to discrimination. But hopefully, we both agree that discrimination is wrong.

For college admissions, I support using a pass/fail method of objectively selecting students to be part of a "lottery".

So, if as in my daughter's case 13,000 applicants were competing for the 152 acceptances, the school would start out by culling the group down using totally objective measures like experience, GPA, and MCAT scores. Then out of say the final 1000 applicants simply drawing at random and assigning numbers 1 through 1000. Once 152 students accepted the remaining would be put on a "wait list" and notified of their ranking.

Again, I support women's right to make their own career choices. I support equal pay for equal work. I oppose discrimination based on gender. I think we can achieve those goals.

I reject managing "outcomes" against a target and using quotas to achieve those outcomes. I oppose universal basic income unless it can be achieved without taking money away from one person and giving it to another. I do support a social safety net.

As a society, we should endeavor to as much as possible create a world of equal opportunity, understanding that it will produce unequal outcomes. But those unequal outcomes should be a function of the talent and merit and individual choices of individuals (along with some luck), not their race or gender.

In a modern society with a decreasing need for labor and a world presently overpopulated, the need of women to be "baby makers" has to a large extent gone away. No woman should feel obligated to have babies, but women should be free to choose to have them or not have them.

China found attempting to manage population was the dumbest thing they ever did. I hope the world does not make the same mistake trying to manage climate.

But like all personal choices, having a child creates individual responsibilities. When societies begin to mandate women have babies, then they will need to play a greater role supporting them. I hope we don't get to that point, since it will most like produce sinister outcomes.

I think the rewards of having children outweigh the costs. I feel sorry for people that have not enjoyed the full experience of being a parent. On the other hand, at least they don't know what they are missing at a personal level.

My sister chose not to marry or have children; I think it was a good choice for her. She missed not having a husband or a child at times, but I don't think she wanted the responsibilities that went with being a wife and mother.

You suggested, I choose people in my image, but actually it is the opposite. I always felt the goal of a leader is to put together a team of people who can cover for the individual weaknesses of the other members. My skills were analytical and imagining how to take failing companies and make them work. I hired executives who knew how to drive sales, chose people based on their clinical skills, leadership skills, etc. More like putting a puzzle together with different pieces, than replicating one piece. If anything, I tended to over hire women and minorities rather than white men.

My reason for over hiring women and minorities had nothing to do with the gender or race, but rather many women and minorities enter the work force with the desire to prove themselves. This desire drives them to work harder, then white men, who feel they don't need to prove themselves. Even among my white staff, I had a disproportionate share of gay man and women, who wanted to prove themselves. When you are trying to save a company going under, you have to hire the best. Several studies support my observations, but again these are generalizations, and so one needs to look past skin color and gender.

It is one reason, I did not like nonprofit organizations or companies so profitable that they did not have to worry about the future. The more bureaucratic an organization becomes, the more the people hire other people because they "like" them. I do agree when "like" becomes a criterion, discrimination is likely to creep in.

I had a VP of Human Resources accused of gender discrimination. I was new to the company; the head of HR was not. After five years of hiring and a staff of 15 people, she never hired a single male.

We were sued for gender discrimination and the VP resigned not wanting it on her record, that she was responsible for gender bias, and we settled the suit. So, I understand where you are coming from, and companies need to do better. Whether the bias is driven by a man or a woman.

My defense is I was new to the company. After that suit we did a thorough study to make sure we had no similar issues at the company.

I do believe that the world is full of misogynists, feminists, racists, and other people who routinely discriminate against others. But the world is a huge place and so my advice to people is find a company that does not discriminate and work like crazy to prove you are the best. Companies that discriminate are saying "we don't need the best people" and over the long term, they will lose.

I wonder if my focus on finding the best is what led me to marry an Asian woman and my son to marry a black woman. I am not saying Asian or black women are better, but when you ignore color, the potential to find the best person for you increases exponentially, even as the probability of her being white decreases.

MLK's vision is slowly coming true. We are not there yet. Slowly but surely, we are moving towards a world where people are defined by character not color or gender. Sadly, the antisemitism on college campuses highlights that not everyone is on board with this trend.

It is time our country does not apologize for the western values of individualism over group identity. Individualism perfected allows each person the opportunity (not guarantee) to reach their full potential. As soon as group identity enters the picture, discrimination begins to influence outcomes and people will feel disenfranchised.