I just don't understand how any thinking person can argue this. If women were actually taking less money for the same output then why would anyone hire a man? Discrimination surely exists, but do you really think that not one single company ever would take advantage of this fact to become successful?
As the article argues, the reduction is largely due to a reduction in the "unexplained part", which is usually attributed to discrimination.
You can also find other sources on Wikipedia suggesting your claim is wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male–female_income_disparity_i...