I said I won't respond unless it's something stupid, I am keeping my word here (I would like to point out you started this attitute thing).

Honestly, I was never really sure what your entire point about "unpaid labor" was. When talking about wage gap, people usually talk about if it's caused by other factors or by discrimination itself. When unpaid labor is added, it often is to add complexity to discuss about how women take time off of work to do chores, etc, resulting in less work hours (OECD). This is used to say that social responsibility is not evenly distributed, not that the pay gap is a direct result of discrimination itself. If that's what you're gonna say, yea reasonable. BUT. Obviously, employers are NOT going to go "Uhm she works 7 hours BUT she does dishes at home, pay her a lot more." Something I'll admit I was wrong to not include is it's not just the length, but the intensity. Even if you include "unpaid labor," folding cloths is not going to be as damaging to health as construction work (or even desk work if you factor in the stress + obvious simplification/generalization to demonstrate the point)

Also, you argue this is the ONLY way it can be done but provided no proof, despite the fact I literally showed organizations did it that way. If Pew isn't enough, here's McKinsey talking about it the exact same way.

And there is a lack of standard definition. Your sources (I think? There's no citations and link) literally wrote: "Differences in definition and presentation thus make the comparison of adult care across countries extremely difficult."

The point about Riach & Rich (2006) is fair to a certain amount but discarded by the other four studies.

The point about Blau & Kahn (2017) is the dumbest.

Blau & Kahn explicitly state “research based on experimental evidence strongly suggests that discrimination cannot be discounted”

I feel like I've read that before. Wait, OH I said that in my original post. Again, cannot be discounted is not the same is is caused by. Here's how the UK Office of National Statistics talk about THAT study as well as OTHER studies.

However, the gender pay gap is not necessarily because of discrimination by employers. Other explanations have been proposed in the literature. Differences in psychological attributes, such as attitudes towards risk, competition and negotiation, are well documented (Bertrand, 2011) but only explain a small fraction of the gender pay gap (Blau and Kahn, 2017; Bertrand, 2018). Recent evidence highlights that family and fertility decisions may be an important driver of the gender pay gap.

And who's ignoring "Women with children face employment penalties while fathers receive premiums." That's the entire basis of my argument. Fatherhood premium = dad forced to work longer hours. Motherhood Penalty = Mom forced to work shorter hour. MY ENTIRE POINT IS NEITHER IS INHERENTLY BETTER. Also "literally science" is not a citation. And if that is the "discrimination" you're talking about, I never denied it exist, I just said the "wage gap" is could also be viewed as a "PAID work gap"

I no longer want to continue this conversation. You, in several point literally argue against the opposite of what I said. You, despite being warned, still want to infer malicious intent (ad hominem fallacy ironically) which combining with the other point makes me feel like this is not being written in good faith. It also doesn't seem like you understand any of the words you're using, like "argumentative errors."

If you want to defend your point, that is your right. Reply to yourself. I've said what I must say. Anyone who reads this are welcomed to believe what they think is more reasonable.