Today's Minnesota Daily article concerning the gender gap in faculty earnings was an interesting one.
It lays a few informational points about the review that was done, and statistics show that male faculty here at the U make on average, 2.2% more than their female counterparts. The article makes use of Murray Clayton, a professional consultant and professor of statistics at University of Wisconsin, Madison. I take this including of his opinion as ethos, however, he makes some claims that I feel are not substantially supported.
He mentions that a gender gap is "sometimes justifiable if based on merit." However, what he and the author of this article do no include is that the movement for more women in higher educational institutions is a fairly infant one, when compared to how long men has held positions in higher ed.
Women have only have the last 30 years or so to gain proper tenure and "merit" as Clayton puts it, while men have had much more time. Therefore, his argument about merit must be taken with a grain of salt, because even with merit being considered gender neutral in the present, when evaluating why and how this gender inequity came to be, we must also look to the past.
At any rate, the article does make use of many female faculty members, which pulls not only on ethos, but I also recognize some pathos as well. Being a woman, and seeing women working towards equality can be an emotional experience for some.