There is a Wage Gap Between Men and Women in the Workforce

In this first portion my opponent, instead of actually refuting any of my argument goes and uses an ad hom against me. We must discard this. She states that I haven't offered up any evidence in regards to this, but we can see that infact I did in source number 3. It's also very strange as my opponent actually talks about this in her own arguments in nearly her first entire half of her R2 arguments. Ignoring this would be suicide for her own arguments. I have previously shown how many women are single parents and forced to take less and less time. Sure there are these daycares available, but when you don't make enough money for them or your family is so strapped for cash they have to have a parent stay home and watch the children. Not everyone has the curtesy and the type of capital to afford these things. We also have to factor in maternity leave and a long list of other things that do occur here. Ignoring this argument is simply a concession by my opponent. I extend these arguments across the board. This is the Catch-22 my opponent has set up for herself. She did set up one scope of the debate in Round 1, but then committed a Shifting goal post fallacy to fit a different narrative. I have moved to go and refute the newly one that she had established and now she is wanting to shift it back. I ask that the judges note this. My opponent then goes and attacks me on stats. Please ignore this argument as I have brought up several arguments with full blown stats and economics into the debate and many of them have been dropped, so I will go into those later on. I would also like to point out how my opponent failed to refute that, when placed on an even playing field. That women beat out men, which defeats my opponent's argument. My opponent's attacking of this top 10 is bogus as that came from my CNN source, source 6 to be exact. To refute my opponent's "For 1," the wage gap doesn't include nor count part time, I have brought this up in my last round and I have been the only one to go and actually define the USFG's method of calculation here. As a result, you must accept my evidence over my opponent's as the part time workers, for this portion, is irrelivant. Sure we can all know that an engineer makes more, but this doesn't mean that all female workers are only restricted to these fields, as I have brought up in my last round and has been dropped, this focuses on the medium in the wage gap, NOT the outliers. As a result, my opponent's argument is negated as it doesn't even talk about the purportion of pay and distribution, it just talks about the popularity of the majors, not success. As for "For 2," I've already stated it is from my CNN source (source 6) and the publish date was March 23rd of 2016, so it is quite a recent document. My opponent has dropped several arguments that I have made in this debate and when voting, these should be considered a priori. My opponent has dropped the important fact that women beat out men when on an even playing field of being single starting out, which is the only way that the medical and child portion has yet to kick in. For if this wasn't the case, we can see that women would still beat out men even after pregnancy, but it's obvious that childcare has a major impact on the lives of women everywhere. This has been a major statistic that my opponent claims that I haven't provided and has been dropped by my opponent. She has also dropped the economic argument talking about the decline of wages when a new influx of workers enters the field by 57%, which is a statistic my opponent has not only dropped, but had once again failed to even acknowledge. My opponent has entirely dropped the USFG's method of calculating the wage gap that my opponent is attempting to argue for the existance in the debate, so we can also flow that argument to my side of the debate. My opponent has also dropped any argument that I have had against her case. This is key as the sole fact that she even refuses to defend her own case should result in a ballot in Negation. We can see that my opponent has no arguments left, dropped my attacks against her case, and much of my own arguments I urge a ballot in Negation.