From Slate.com, a map showing the ratio between median income of women and median income of men among men and women employed in 2010. There's a state-level map and a county-level map to explore.
Recently, I've been working with professors Rogers Hall and Emily Shahan and fellow doc student Jennifer Kahn on thinking about statistical analyses and data visualizations in popular media--"statistics in the wild." Emily's math literacies students--Master's and undergraduate pre-service teachers--have beeen looking for examples of presentations of stats in the wild and discussing the way these data visualizations are presented, understood, and might be used in K-12 settings.
This map seems to me a provocative example of our work and a map with real potential for discussion and dissection with students. As the comments to the article point out, there are lots of questions about what's behind this presentation and how the comparison between men and women is working. For example, the legend explains that the map shows "cents the average employed woman makes per $1 the average employed man makes." But how do we think about "average" employed people when the data come from median incomes? Does this map argue that women with equal experience and ability are being paid less than men for the same job? If not, what is it arguing? And how do we come to make sense of the argument?