At any rate, isn't it a little hypocritical to decry that kind of sexist attitude, while actively seeking out an equally biased perspective that favors your own gender?
Nope. Feminism is not biased, and it doesn't favor the female gender. Unless, of course, you think that the notion of fair pay is favoritism.
That's interesting you bring that up. Now, I'm an economist, so I come from a different perspective than most, so don't be offended by what I say next, as its the speak of someone who spends far too much time in databases and statistical models.
Theoretically, there is likely to always be a difference in men's and women's salaries (at least in the current cultural paradigm). This explainable difference arises because only women bear the burden of birthing a child (in the physical sense). This has meant, historically, that women were more likely to be absent from the workplace / workforce at some time. When absent, they are not gaining new skills, or keeping their old skills sharp (this is called a hysterisis effect). That depresses their wages upon re-entry.
Over the last say, 50 years, the wage gap between men and women has declining. Part of this decline is due to women entering fields previously populated by men only, or (perhaps similiarly) into higher paying roles. However, another part of the gap convergence is because of better natal medical care, returning a mother to the work force faster. Telecommuting (as it becomes more normal) will likely continue to decrease this gap. Further convergence is due to cultural (or legal) changes, such as the families and medical leave act.
Yes, a good amount of the gap was due to discrimination (thats the gap we don't like). My point is to explain the non-discriminatory factors and how they are also partly responsible for a wage gap.
As an aside, one of my many jobs in Civil Rights is on this very issue (wage discrimination). What I've presented here is an early in the morning summary of the historical literature before I had coffee