Actually, that isn't so.
<Equal pay is a problem in every occupational category, even in occupations where women considerably outnumber men, the DPE study shows. Last year, for example:
* Female elementary and middle school teachers earned nearly10 percent less than similarly employed men, despite comprising 82 percent of the field.
* Female registered nurses earned more than 10 percent less than their male colleagues, although 90 percent of nurses are women.
* Female physicians and surgeons earned a whopping 41 percent less than their male counterparts.
* Female college and university teachers earned more than 25 percent less than those who were male.
* Female lawyers earned 23 percent less than male lawyers.>
AFL-CIO NOW BLOG | Women Better Educated than Men, Still Paid Less
There is a link to the actual study there.
More;
-Male tenured/tenure-track faculty earn an average of $6,360 more than female counterparts.
-Male full professors make an average $551 more than female full professors.
-Male associate professors make an average $731 more than female associate professors.
-Male assistant professors make average $433 more than female professors.
Source: Investigation of Gender Income Inequality: The Case of Tenured/Tenure-Track Professors at California State University, Chico - Christa Jennings: Honors Research Project, Sociology Department (2003
Regarding the "women take lower paying jobs" argument, it obviously didn't occur to you that this is because jobs traditionally held by women are considered lower in prestige, therefore lower paying.
Take bank tellers, for example. Before it became female dominated, it was a higher status job and paid better. Across the board, traditionally female held dominated jobs are almost universally lower paying, even though many require more education than traditionally male dominated jobs. Coincidence, or discrimination? Look at the trades, for example. Those are good paying jobs which require only apprenticeship in many cases, and at the most, a relatively brief course of study in a trade school.
Taking time off work to take care of children would not affect somebody's career in a society where parenting is valued as much as material wealth and social status are.
One could make the argument that since in more socialistic societies, daycare tends to be subsidized and maternity benefits extensive, it follows that capitalism is a factor is the devaluation of the parental role of workers, which causes women's careers to stall as a result of childrearing.
I don't buy the notion that capitalism is entirely to blame, but it's probably a factor.