This is because in our society, it's more acceptable for men to drop out and get into some skilled trade, like plumbing or climbing telephone poles. People just won't accept that women can also do that. So there's a lot of pressure to make sure your female children go to college and get a degree.
> like plumbing or climbing telephone poles. People just won't accept that women can also do that.
You sure about that? Or is it that the majority of women don't see themselves unclogging toilets for a living? I have never seen it, but I would suspect list of female applications to plumbing or electrician school is very very short.
I do not necessarily agree with the original post’s statement but this response seems confused to me.
Few female applicants to trade schools is consistent with the original statement. If it is societally unacceptable for a woman to be a plumber then I would expect women to act as any rational agent and factor this in when planning their future career.
"societal unacceptability" is only one factor. personal choice is another. there's no reason to assume that gender disparities in a given field or trade are solely the result of the existence of the former.
You’re just infantilizing women by blaming every outcome on “society”. I fully believe women are capable of making their own decisions and there’s no “cabal of men” holding them back from unclogging toilets.
I would argue that I’m neither infantilizing women nor blaming every outcome on society. I never mentioned a cabal of men. It seems you are reading in many themes that are not present in my comment.
I believe that norms shape behaviour, that is the extent of my claim.
It's socially unacceptable for a lot of men to be in trades as well, especially if you factor in family background. Let me know what school promotes trades as a good alternative to traditional education? It's almost always looked at as the options for "stupid" people. I don't think your anecdote holds up at all. It seems fare more likely that women in general just do not want physical labor jobs.
I don’t know what anecdote you are referring to, I did not mention one. I did not even make a statement of agreement or disagreement with the original comment. I just pointed out that I did not see a logical inconsistency.
As for your claim that higher class males avoid trades: yes of course. That is actually a great example of what I mean. People factor in social norms in their decision making, be it male or female.
You are sort of skimming over actual need for actual physical strength in those field. But yes, these are assumed to be boys occupation - including when presented to children.
But like, given they require physical strength, it is hard to make a big deal about it.
I see. And there's no non-college educated professions where women are prevalent? It's plumbing or bust?
Of course clearly when women were under-represented in college, that was due to misogyny. And now that they are over-represented, it's also due to misogyny. No matter what the facts are, the conclusion is the same.
Do you think that when women were under-represented it was because they were plumbers or climbing telephone poles? Because that's the only way your suggestion makes sense.
That is not actually true. The all women are stay at home thing was never true. Society always had women who worked, because they are unmarried, husband is alcoholic, husband died, husband does not earn all that much.
"At the administrative level, 30 percent of human resources assistants had an associate degree as of 2013, 26 percent had a high school diploma and 21 percent had at least one year of college experience" - https://work.chron.com/education-requirements-human-resource...
People have to keep in mind that the trades have generally been pretty sexist and not all that professionally run. I would not want my daughters to go into most trades because of this.
It's a lot easier for men to find a decent paying job that doesn't require a college degree and where you won't get regularly harassed.
