Are you under the impression that I am forging this info?

No, I'm under the impresssion that you're citing information that is obscure and vague.

Median weekly earnings of women employed in education and health services were $717, which was 77 percent of men's median weekly earnings in that industry.

>which was 77 percent of men's median weekly earnings in that industry.

It says "in that industry", not "in the same positions of employment". Those women could work as substitute teachers or other lesser positions that would warrant less pay. The fact that this study doesn't clearly state or differentiate positions makes me suspicious.

Median weekly earnings of women employed in mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction ($873) and public administration ($783) were substantially higher than the earnings of their counterparts employed in leisure and hospitality ($421) and agriculture and related industries ($413).

Lol. This works against you. This says women were paid MORE when working in more meaningful positions. This says that women who worked in mining and manufacturing made more than a woman working at the front desk at a hotel. A no brainer.

Women's-to-men's earnings ratios were higher among women employed in construction (92 percent) and agriculture and related industries (85 percent) than among women employed in other services (72 percent) and financial activities (71 percent).

Again, this works against you. This isn't comparing men or women, this is showing that women make more in more technical industries.

Did you even fucking read that source before linking it? Because you literally gave me ammunition.