In the West, or as a whole?  Because in the West, the reasons for the wage gap are explained when you actually look into the details of the BLS study that most people quote when proclaiming the 77 cent difference, and it's not that women are paid less per hour for equal work.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

I think my faith in humanity has just been restored! I came across an article on Gawker a while back about a feminist trolling men's rights activists with quotes from Good will Hunting and that was linked through Kotaku, and pretty much all the opinions were the opposite of these. Many qualified Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) as pu**ies and used very violent and derogatory terms to qualify them. I was so shocked at the one-sidedness of the comments that I actually created an account just to try to give people some facts and to defend, as briefly as possible, the MRA movement.

Unfortunately, it would seem that society is so brainwashed that people, men included, don't understand the necessity of MRAs and the MRA movement. So conditioned are people that they will automatically jump at any MRAs as a reflex without taking the time to do research or think critically. So conditioned they are to political correctness and feminist views that they claim men have nothing to complain about, that men have all the privileges, that the only ones who suffer are women. I truly felt that humanity was coming to an end.

Reading these comments on this site has really restored my faith that people are not as brainwashed as I thought, that they are capable of thinking for themselves and against the polically correct conditioned views feminists would like us all to have. Gawker isn't Jezebel (in which case I would understand better the comments), but the violence of the comments made me understand that Kotaku and the associated sites are run by extreme feminists, either because of political correctness or by ignorance on men's issues.

I would just like to extend a big thank you to all! Thanks!

Part of the problem with this, and many issues nowadays is that people trust the News/Journalists, to be truthful in their reporting.  People also conflate sites like Gawker, with Journalism.  These are fallacies.  Whether this has always been done, or whether it's a new phenomena, the facts are, people take studies and then cherry pick the data to support their own argument.  Such as with the BLS report I spoke of above.  That report does indeed show that men earned more money, however, neglects to inform any reader (and in some cases seeks to bury the information) that the report qualifies 'full-time' work as any job where you work at least 35 hours a week.  But, forgets to highlight the fact that men tend to work longer hours (and I've never worked a full-time job that was less than 40hrs/wk).

It's pseudo-science, and it preys on the fact that people simply do not have the time to read through and interpret all the data in every study that's released (and this doesn't touch on studies that are just plain garbage to begin with).  Situations like this, that literally set people at each other, are why I really feel that the News should be held to a higher standard, much like the Army, or the Fire Dept, or Police.   While I'm a firm believer in Freedom of Speech, I also think that knowingly/purposefully misinforming the public is...well, straight up evil.

I believe Fox News perfected this tactic, and that the rest of the media adopted their tactics, simply as a means of raising viewership numbers.

Well through out history and many different issues there are always more extreme views. So far History eventually shuns them. The days when science was condemned and often looked at as witchcraft or blasphemy are long over... for the most part. Lessons can be learned on how extreme view points can be with people thinking they are not.  It's not a hive Mind but groups of people can be swayed into a skewed vision or misleading position. Teaching a child 2+2=5 doesn't mean the child is at fault, they believe it to be true because of what they thought they learned.

A person, group or figure (Kotaku in your example) typically gravitate torward the overall mindset. It's why people like Anita Sarkeensian can blatantly change the definition of sexism and get away with it or using tactics of making one good point then fallowed by a more extreme one trying to ease people into the mindset that they are overall in the right allowing criticisms to be ignored. Society will likely be able to move on and remember these people for what they are... Nutjobs.

All facades eventually break or fail so long as the general populations intelligence increases. Ironically even those extreme views serve as something to learn from.

Also it's worth noting due to an earlier conversation. The reason for Men and women groups is for more focused discussion. It's not uncommon for all types of things to be cut up and made individual discussion.  It may not always be preductive but overall the thinking and mindset on how it should work is sound... If it will be productive, thats another story.

Very much worth noting.  When you view everything zoomed out too far, you often miss things. 

Ill give feminists the time of day the moment they have a beautiful spokesperson. Because right now they seem like regular women that are jealous of beautiful women and hate men. Show me a gorgeous woman talk about all the problems shes facing in her daily life. Then Ill acknowledge the problem.

You get many fat, unhealthy women speaking up about how no one will give them jobs..

...uuurghh love I wonder why..

The women who do believe there is some mythical gender inequality in the west go on to do gender studies courses.
Those courses have no jobs attached to them.
So the same feminists can only make there money working meaningless jobs for money, and flexing their feminazi skills over blogs, youtube and tumblr.

The 'normal' girls you're talking about do not exist in feminism, because whatever issues they have, whatever problems that may be holding them back in life, they realise it is their problem, as does everyone in life have problems, and it is their problem to sort, sorta the whole point of life that we rely on ourselves once we commit to adulthood. 

You seem to have a problem distinguishing between figuritive and literal. 

Oh they dont give them jobs because they are fat? mmm, ad thats why they complain... because beutifull woman get works that they dont... then you are kind of giving them the reason you know?, there is still a hell lot of sexism in today peoples mind. A lot of victimism also, in both parts.

Ok so I read the studies but I'm not sure they support entirely your insistence that I'm wrong. The studies showed that women are preferred among men in teaching positions of academic science. Additionally, it purported that the reason women only make up 20% of the field is because far fewer women enter the field than do men.

Furthermore, none of the studies explained why the men chose women. Just that they did.
I mean, I could suppose that men simply preferred looking at women's faces.

And the part about maternal leave is odd as well. Women didn't have any preference, but men did.
Perhaps it is still sexism involved in thinking that women should be 'caretakers'.

Anyhoo, my objections notwithstanding, again, none of the listed articles actually counters what I said....simply that in one field, professors favor women over men. These aren't even the people that do the hiring, they're just professors.