Magazine charges men 26% more for latest issue to reflect gender pay gap

Twitter reacts to provocative double cover price.

Two covers with two different pricesâ€”one at $8.81, the other at our regular price of $6.99â€”to reflect the 26 per cent gap between full-time wages paid to men and women in Canada. Here's why Maclean's is doing this. #PayEquity https://t.co/cxPv7B8BOe pic.twitter.com/ZGjgsNPR3K
— Maclean's Magazine (@macleans) February 8, 2018

Canadian magazine Maclean's will charge men 26% more for a copy this month in a bid to promote equal pay of men and women.

The latest issue will sell for C$6.99 to women and C$8.81 to men (£3.98 and £5.01). The editorial points to an Australian university study called the Gender Pay Gap Bake Sale - which charged men more for cupcakes - as an inspiration.

The 26% difference is based on the average Canadian wage of a full-time male worker and a full-time female worker across all jobs, ages and education.

The gender pay gap argument flared up again recently with news that Mark Wahlberg earned about 1,500 times as much as co-star Michelle Williams during re-shoots of All the Money in the World.

Wahlberg has since donated his re-shoot earnings to the Times Up campaign.

Twitter reacted to Maclean's cover price disparity with its usual mix of bouquets and brickbats:

I recall writing papers on #PayEquity in secondary school and yet here I am 25+ years later and the 26% difference really hasn't changed. Thanks for prompting a conversation among Canadians.
— Chris P (@cvprentice) February 8, 2018

Please note that the only ones disputing this are, in fact, those being stated as earning more. And those not commenting on it are those of us afraid of the backlash and threats from them.
— Polly Hidalgo (@pollyhidalgo) February 8, 2018

Well done.
— damediana (@bea_beattie) February 8, 2018

But the majority of feedback slammed the magazine and pointed to the variables not considered:

The wage gap has little to do with discrimination, it's mostly due to personal choice. If you feel a company isn't paying you fairly then demand more money or find a different job.
— Chuck Mackenzie (@donkeychucker2) February 8, 2018

Women earn less because of choices. Women work fewer hours, want a better life/work balance & tend 2 go to lower paying fields. There isn't an economist in the world who take the WG seriously. You have lost all credibility as a publication. You're liars. #FakeNews
— RailRoaded (@RRoaded) February 8, 2018

the gender pay gap how many times and in how many ways must this be disproven before you will accept it is not real...good christ its a dead horse stop whipping it
— MIke Larmour (@MIkeLarmour) February 8, 2018

any woman stupid enough to fall for this marketing prank deserves to make less
— I'm the bubba (@Imthebubba) February 8, 2018

I'm glad I don't bother wasting my money on the magazine anyway. Have fun spreading your propaganda.
— DoomRulz2 (@DoomRulz2) February 8, 2018

Maclean's, your magazine is intellectually void. There is no wage gap and if you want to lose business so be it.
— Andrew Duval ðŸ‡¨ðŸ‡¦ (@NorthernDragon) February 8, 2018

And do not forge the trolls of Twitter:

Wait, are you assuming your readerâ€™s gender?
— Vamos Mets (@VamosMets) February 8, 2018

I don't see the other genders represented.
How much will I, as a Supreme Dark Overlord have to pay? How much does an attack helicopter have to pay? #Discrimination
— LordDeplorableðŸ¸ðŸ‘ŒðŸ¥“ (@m_morganthomas) February 8, 2018