97 Advantages of being female

[DonFerrari]

SvennoJ said:

DonFerrari said:

Very good articles... most of times I turn my face on the allegations of gap claims because the method of analysis is very unclear or biased. But other than the monetary question it was very good (and if we consider the necessity of heavier lifters and the lack of supply it would "justify" paying more for them). If I were asked about working in healthcare I would just say I don't like blood, difficulty of the subject wouldn't be a problem, but the dedication to the career is very serious and necessary.

On the second problem I particularly never saw a problem in having more women as teacher before high school, but I can see several instances of teachers that favour female students (but most of cases I saw male teacher doing it) and never saw in a way that it harrassed the male students, but I can't say for other places. Anyway for me it is more of a problem on how female teachers are doing it than the lack of male teachers. And the answer for why there is less male teacher before high school is quite clear on the text, besides the paedophilia suspicion the biggest reason is the lesser payment for under high school than on high school and university.

And I agree with you, all distortions must be corrected as needed independently  of gender, and hopefully based on more concrete and unbiased studies, and the biggest chance of that to happen is using market reality.

It's a bit iffy justifying paying male nurses more because they are in higher demand. At first it sounds logical, yet then you get situations where physically strong women get paid less than physically weaker men, and you get the same justified complaints when there's preferential treatment to hiring lesser qualified females over more qualified males in the private sector.

I think more balanced gender distribution is very important in education. That's where children learn how the world works by example. Having male role models in education are just as important as the message itself. It's been a long time since I was in school, and from my memory it was pretty balanced, definitely not the glaring 1 to 10 distribution that article exposes.
However in high school the stereotypes were very much enforced. All science teachers were male, all but 1 language teachers were female. Sure, men and women have better tendencies in those areas, but not at those absolutes. Of course it's a struggle to get more girls into science when all exposure to science at school is from men. At least the principle was a women, not all stereotypes.
I don't know how it is today, my kids aren't in high school yet. Their primary school is pretty much all female. And the first thing I heard about volunteering at school is that you have to go through a police check 3 months prior. Understandable maybe, still rubbed me the wrong way.

And yes, the old stereotypes of patriarchy together with lower payment put men out of primary schools. The man must make more money, something that still nags some people today. Market reality can work, yet with the deck stecked against equality from birth a little more is needed.

About the gap, it's just market if you need that professional and there isn't enough you will pay more... but certainly there will be some iffy cases.

Before High School I just got male teacher on 9th grade or so. It wasn't 1:10 it was 0. Don't think it impaired me much, but who knows. I don't think balance only per balance brings value, but enable balance to come naturaly can bear fruits. Nothing that is unnatural to humans or society will stablish itself even if forced.

On the math classes on High school I had male, on languagues it was woman and gays. Geography, history and biological was split. And I actually believe that altough it isn't absolute (since I have female friends that are mathematicians and male friends that pursue languages) the poll is very gendered - perhaps it's a bad thing, and we can encourage and remove barriers to have people look at all options. My family never pressured me or showed a profession to be male or female adherent, but I was influenced by my father career more or less and at historical payments.

I'll have several years before my 1y old start going through the grades... it's horrible that we have to screen people, but between prejudice, inconvenience and else from adults and children safety I choose second (but seeing that nowadays women are almost the same as man on child abuse I would screen both).

Well there was a pressure to earn more because of being a man, but from early age I always loved money so it wasn't really patriarch society that pressured me. And if my wife could earn enough for me to be at home and she to work I would accept, but seeing our career options unless my backup plan works I'll still be the main provider in my house for the years to come. And I want to push further enough that on the backup plan she can at least be more time home to enjoy our son and raise him well. I don't like the idea that both of us sacrifice ourselves and can't enjoy the baby