"As a scientist, every day I read and interpret data."

It's surprising then that, as a scientist, you'd appropriate that garbage statistic about women earning $0.76 for every dollar a man earns. Most people know by now that this calculation never controlled for factors like hours worked, occupation, etc.

When a UW study replicated the calculation for Seattle, using an appropriate statistical approach, they found the disparity was $0.94-0.97 for every dollar. It's worth noting that this disparity was statistically significant, so there is definitely is a pay gap, but it's hardly the yawning chasm the lunatics on the far-left would have you believe.

While we're on the subject of pay gaps, it's funny how you never hear about the one between Asian and white men, which happens to be $0.76. Interestingly, this disparity is almost the same as the one between white men and Latino men.

Any plans to address this, Emily?

If Emily is much of a scientist at all she realizes women are innately more nurturing and designed by billions of years of evolution to be good at and derive satisfaction from nurturing their children.
As a scientist she of course realizes that the push by "Feminists" over the past several generations to push women out of the home was prompted not by science but by personal preference in spite of science.
As a scientific advocate for women she will insist that society support and foster women who long to mother their children.
Emily will do all these things because she is very scientific woman, Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera

@1 is right;
the gender/wage disparity "studies" are steaming piles of bullshit.
If there is one woman making less money that a man for the same work/experience Emily should tell us who/where and it will be corrected in a split second.
It doesn't happen.

3: Bernie Sanders campaign is the one example I can come up with off the top of my head.