This was a particularly good essay of yours. One thing that strikes me is that not only are we valuing women over men, we STILL seem to devalue the fields they used to dominate (teaching, nursing, caretaking, etc.)
It’s almost as if men are being devalued while simultaneously devaluing women who aren’t enough like men.
We are NOT valuing women over men! Men have never been devalued, except in the fevered imaginations of men like Reeves, who see all successful women as thieves who have stolen something from a man.
"One thing that strikes me is that not only are we valuing women over men," Yes, that is what you said. I do agree with the other part of your statement, which is "...we STILL seem to devalue the fields they used to dominate (teaching, nursing, caretaking, etc.)" If you were being ironic in the first part of your statement, I apologize, but I have to wonder why you think Haider's essay was particularly good, since she seems to believe some of Reeve's incel talking points without the slightest recognition that everything he says has been used to fight against women's attempts to level the playing field for decades.
the decline of male-only or male-oriented groups explicitly is something i'm now concerned about, especially with young men. i'm not talking about men's rights or whatever. i don't even care about women in this context, men need to stand up, and just take leadership instead of cowering. until we figure that out our culture will be out of balance. we're starting to become like the inverse of saudi arabia in some sectors IMO
It’s something I’ve been concerned about too. People undervalue the importance of male-friendships and male only spaces. I think, at least in part, the the reason so many men aren’t stepping up is because they are incredibly isolated right now. It’s hard to be motivated when you don’t have the support and friendship of the friends of your own gender.
i've only started realizing how different male-only groups are recently after being part of some implicitly male-only groups. it's not all "locker room" talk
That’s what I’ve heard. I know a lot of men who have a hard time opening up around women, so these male friendships become incredibly important for them.
No one has taken male-only spaces away from men. Women have lobbied for our OWN spaces for centuries, and only finally received them a few decades ago, just to have them ripped away --- BY MEN.
If you're referring to biological males self-ID'ing their way into women's spaces, I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone 'round these here parts that supports those policies. This is TERF turf.
I'm a TERF. You're not a TERF because you're a man. Men can't be feminists at all, much less radical feminists. The problem here, is that you are trying to use one instance of not supporting male colonization to distract from the fact you support all other forms of male control. So thanks for nothing, and don't pretend to be any woman's ally.
Who the hell downloads porn? That sounds like a great way to fuck up a perfectly good computer with viruses. Plus, trying to put terabytes of anything on a PC would crash it.
I really love how well adjusted and thoughtful everyone is being in this comment section. Everyone is being so kind and persuasive and not at all weird.
It's consistently driven by other non-gender factors, like amount of OT worked. Men statistically work longer hours, which one way or another leads to higher pay. Ever compared the timesheets along with the paystubs? When a woman is working 35 hours a week while a man in the next cubicle works 55 hours a week, it's not a "gender gap" that explains the man getting larger raises and bonuses.
FWIW, it was a woman named Claudia Goldin who did the most research into non-linear wage growth. (she won the 2016 IZA Prize by the Bonn-based Institute for the Study of Labor based on that research) If working a 40 hour week brings in a salary of $50k, an 80 hour week (i.e. double the hours) tends to bring in closer to a $120k salary (i.e. MORE than double the pay). Men statistically working the lion's share of longer hours also means men tend to get bigger raises, bigger bonuses, and more rapid promotions.
And that’s without considering socioeconomic factors. White educated women make significantly more, on average, than black men. It’s not a cut and dry issue with a clear solution as some would have it be.
When a person thinks their "personal experience" amounts to scientific research, that's the end of the conversation for me. But good for you for taking the time to explain lol.
That Pew one comes right out and says "Much of this gap has been explained by measurable factors such as educational attainment, occupational segregation and work experience.", which the others also agree on. A women making lattes at Starbucks and getting paid less than a man working as an electrical engineer isn't being discriminated against.
The closest they get to claiming actual confirmed discrimination is "overrepresented in lower-paying occupations", which is a combination of choosing shitty paying jobs like baristas and the self-inflicted glass ceiling effect of working less OT over their careers than men, who leverage that OT to get promoted. All other discussions of discrimination are heged in "may be a factor" terms, but there isn't even an attempt to quantify it.
So yeah, men getting paid more for equivalent work is fake news. If it worked that way, capitalists would exclusively hire women to save money and increase profits.
Fuck your blogs. Goldin is a ball-palming cunt, like our friend Sarah Haider here. Trying to score brownie points from dicks because they believe the hype that it's a post-feminist world, and no one will read her unless she peddles the narrative about "restoring balance".
Always heartwarming to see women supporting other women by calling them "ball-palming cunts" on the internet for being a prize-winning economist. Truly a win for feminism.
You have no idea how funny I find it that I, an accountant, am being called a knuckle-dragger. Accountants have plenty of stereotypes, but that generally isn't one of them.
I also think it's funny that you think I'd need Goldin to "protect" me. I'm one of those guys who worked 80+ hour weeks for 7 years to lock in the fat salary I'm currently getting paid. I met tons of smart women along the way, but they pretty consistently negotiated with employers in very different ways than I did. They prioritized work-life balance and boundaries, while I sacrificed those things for higher pay.
I have two white sons and this is my fear for them. In trying to level the playing field for everyone else they’ve thrown sons like mine off a cliff. It’s intentional and backed by bad statistics like the wage gap. I’m a woman in a STEM field. I’m not underpaid as compared to my male peers. Freakanomics did a podcast episode years ago about a wage gap study that Uber did and it was pretty interesting. It debunked that $0.75 for every $1 myth as well as showed that men pick risker and therefore more lucrative routes (early mornings, late nights and they drive faster) and that any wage gap (at the time something like $0.97 for every $1) was not due to discrimination but choices.
Taking things away from men intentionally to prop up women isn’t feminism, it’s revenge.
It's funny at my company (semiconductor industry) if I got a black woman hired I would get 5 grand bonus for no other reason then them being black and a woman. If they were merely woman it would be 4 grand.
The notion that stem is discriminating against women is laughable to me when they will pay rather large referral bonuses to get women hired. You think there might be other positive discrimination at play? like illegal quotas?
Refreshingly insightful article on gendered financial inequality. Your points about men being more likely to be given loans and investments due to their perceived financial stability and men being given gifts to demonstrate their value or worth are clear examples of how societal expectations and biases can lead to unequal treatment and opportunities for men and women.
It’s really interesting how the ways in which this gendered financial inequality can have long-term consequences on individuals and their financial stability. It's not just about receiving a one-time gift or loan, but rather the accumulated financial support and opportunities that can lead to greater financial success.
Your bringing attention to this important issue is appreciated, and I hope more will recognize and address these inequalities to foster a more equal opportunity and a more fair society for all.
Did we read the same article? I WISH your take was what Haider was trying to express. It looked to me like she was drinking Reeve's koolaid by the kegful. Your comments are excellent. I hope someone pulls her out of the rabbit hole before it's too late...
Good read. I have always been very intrigued in how far the pendulum of "Corrective Action" swings. For centuries, women were barred from going into certain fields, especially STEM. Now it seems that the corrective action isn't just to facilitate our entrance into the field, but it's beginning to feel more and more forced. More about signaling than actually caring. Thanks for pointing that out. If only people can see that.
Hi, I enjoy your writing and think this essay raises good points.
I wonder if the higher variance in male IQs explains some of the academic discrepancy between men and women. Males seem to have a higher proportion of individuals at both tails of the bell curve.
Also, men tend to do poorer in coursework but better on high-stakes test such as the SAT, which may be due to personality traits. On average, boys outscore girls on the SAT but are clobbered on the achievement-oriented GCSEs.
What the fuck did I just read? I hope you were being facetious. The reason more women are going to college is NOT because of more scholarships being given to women, or that man-hating activists have taken over academia. It's because WOMEN have ALWAYS had to work harder than men to get into college, and with some of the OBSTACLES removed, women are no longer SHUT OUT of college, except where colleges actually cheat and give men an undeserved advantage on entrance exams.* Women are finally free to excel without apology. And men are STILL trying to rip our achievements out of our hands, and cry "Foul!" when a woman takes something to which men feel entitled. It's sounds like challenging male entitlement chafes you. Why? Are you a male supremacist? Do you believe that men SHOULD be given priority in every context?
You claim "...male students are at a higher risk of dropping out of college than any other group..." DROPPING OUT is entirely their choice; they aren't being KICKED out of school, and no one else has any obligation to keep these men interested in their own betterment. Perhaps they resent having top honors go to women- where they should have ALWAYS belonged. I was the top student of my EMT program. The males who flunked the course the previous year were allowed to retake it, and they demanded to have their 2nd attempt scores counted against the 1st-time scores of the current A students (all female), and succeeded in bumping the women out of the honors we worked for and deserved.
Men still receive massive financial packages in the form of sports sponsorships - they are being courted by professional sports teams from the second they set foot on campus. None of the women's sports benefits are comparable. Very few women can build a professional career, much less become a multi-millionaire, from playing sports. Now mediocre (and aging) male athletes are being allowed to join women's teams for a second shot at glory- at the expense of the women's achievements and opportunities. Men are USED TO being indulged in this manner. That doesn't mean they deserve it, or that we should feel uncomfortable when a woman succeeds. But we often do, because a woman's success is nearly always followed by the complaints of a resentful man who believes HER achievement should have been HIS.
Hardly anything has changed for women in the workplace. If you attempt to use any of the protections set in place to deal with discrimination, "at will" employment laws provide all the loopholes any employer needs to remove you. Upper management and executive jobs still go almost entirely to men, even at companies that claim to embrace diversity.
It's only natural for more women to seek higher education when we know how impossible the work force will be for us while men still run EVERYTHING. I shouldn't be surprised that you think it's unfair for women to have any tiny lead over men, when you are in deep denial about the wage gap. Consider what it means to have more women than men in college- do men actually lose anything? They have no problem getting IN to school. They are leaving by their own choice. So what do men actually lose, when they will still be prioritized when they enter the workforce, and why should ANYONE care about this one statistic, especially a member of the demographic that these poor entitled manbabies will oppress for the rest of their lives?
"Women who wish to “break barriers” in STEM can look forward to diving into a mountain of money, but men who wish to do the same in a profession like Speech-Language Pathology (90%+ female) can look forward to nothing of the sort. " THIS IS PROOF OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN! This IS the smoking gun! Male-dominated fields PAY MORE because the paycheck has traditionally gone to a DICK. How do you not get this?
"The steady decline of male-exclusive clubs and associations might be, at least in this sense, a bad thing." Apparently, you have no interest in addressing rape culture on campus, or how it leads to a hostile working environment in the future for women. The Greek system should be abolished. For men. Sororities are vital networking resources for women. Men will continue to build their private fiefdoms on the golf course, where they DO have the HIGHER FUCKING SALARIES to afford the country-club memberships. I'm still holding out hope you were being sarcastic.. because if you are earnestly agreeing with a smug misogynist asswipe like Reeves, you're well on your way to becoming a men's rights activist.
You are a misandrist. It's sad that this form of bigotry is now considered socially acceptable in our culture. You are contributing to a movement that is causing untold damage, and I hope you recover one day.
Ok, lets take a look in a place where there are no thumbs on the scale: business. When we look at the top males in wealth we find self made men like Musk, Gates, Bezos, etc. When we look at the richest women we find Walton heirs, widow of Steve Jobs, and the ex-wife of Bezos. Not a single self made woman in the top ten. Many of the men in the Stanford class of '94 became billionaires, none of the women. If you read the story of Theranos it is clear how far powerful & rich people will go to push a female Steve Jobs.
The thing is, don't get mad get even. If you're right about the wage gap then you can become very wealthy on the differential: start an enterprise with only women! Although this is not how the richest women made their wealth so there might be more effective ways. Why not?
Your rant shows a deep misunderstanding of how society works. There is no male conspiracy that sets male salaries higher than women. Males are more interested in working with things than women are, and working with things tend to scale better and that makes it more profitable than jobs where you need to interact with people, the jobs more preferred by women.
Then again, reading your rather hysterical reactions I doubt you'd be interested in a fair discussion.
I appreciate this article and learned a lot from the comments, as well. I didn’t think about the wage gap being a flawed argument until I read a commenter share about how men tend to work more OT hours, leading to naturally higher annual wages. However, what’s missing from this point is something I’ve personally experienced and cannot walk away from this thread without mentioning -- and that’s the issue of career interruptions for women. More woman are impacted by career interruptions, which leads to lower earning potential overtime. Whether they take breaks from their career for childcare responsibilities or elderly parental care, women take on the brunt of this work in a society where universal healthcare or elder-care isn’t available. I’ve personally had to take off over a year from work between my two kids and have been told point-blank during hiring processes that my earning potential is based off of “traditional years in the workforce.” The years I’ve taken off to take care for my kids -- even tho I was writing, volunteering, building, oh and raising human beings -- means nothing for my earning potential and I’ve suffered because of it.
I banned her. Sorry guys—I thought I would open comments to everyone, obviously that was a mistake.
Perfect illustration of some of points above though, wasn’t it. :)
On a different topic, Sarah, Connor Friedersdorf featured this piece in his newsletter! I love it when two people I follow also are in conversation 😎
Got a link?
Mikes, scroll all the way down
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2023/01/are-sports-worth-the-risks/672643/
Maybe now she'll go touch grass after all lol
This was a particularly good essay of yours. One thing that strikes me is that not only are we valuing women over men, we STILL seem to devalue the fields they used to dominate (teaching, nursing, caretaking, etc.)
It’s almost as if men are being devalued while simultaneously devaluing women who aren’t enough like men.
We are NOT valuing women over men! Men have never been devalued, except in the fevered imaginations of men like Reeves, who see all successful women as thieves who have stolen something from a man.
Oh. Is that what I said? Huh...
"One thing that strikes me is that not only are we valuing women over men," Yes, that is what you said. I do agree with the other part of your statement, which is "...we STILL seem to devalue the fields they used to dominate (teaching, nursing, caretaking, etc.)" If you were being ironic in the first part of your statement, I apologize, but I have to wonder why you think Haider's essay was particularly good, since she seems to believe some of Reeve's incel talking points without the slightest recognition that everything he says has been used to fight against women's attempts to level the playing field for decades.
How helpful it is to have an expert in my own thoughts and opinions in the comments!
the decline of male-only or male-oriented groups explicitly is something i'm now concerned about, especially with young men. i'm not talking about men's rights or whatever. i don't even care about women in this context, men need to stand up, and just take leadership instead of cowering. until we figure that out our culture will be out of balance. we're starting to become like the inverse of saudi arabia in some sectors IMO
It’s something I’ve been concerned about too. People undervalue the importance of male-friendships and male only spaces. I think, at least in part, the the reason so many men aren’t stepping up is because they are incredibly isolated right now. It’s hard to be motivated when you don’t have the support and friendship of the friends of your own gender.
i've only started realizing how different male-only groups are recently after being part of some implicitly male-only groups. it's not all "locker room" talk
That’s what I’ve heard. I know a lot of men who have a hard time opening up around women, so these male friendships become incredibly important for them.
Yeah, some of it is rape-apologist talk.
No one has taken male-only spaces away from men. Women have lobbied for our OWN spaces for centuries, and only finally received them a few decades ago, just to have them ripped away --- BY MEN.
If you're referring to biological males self-ID'ing their way into women's spaces, I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone 'round these here parts that supports those policies. This is TERF turf.
I'm a TERF. You're not a TERF because you're a man. Men can't be feminists at all, much less radical feminists. The problem here, is that you are trying to use one instance of not supporting male colonization to distract from the fact you support all other forms of male control. So thanks for nothing, and don't pretend to be any woman's ally.
I was actually referring to Sarah, not myself, since this is techically her turf, but do go off.
I'm going to go ahead and guess.......seven. Seven cats in your apartment.
LOL
I'm going to go ahead and guess....... ten. Ten terabytes of porn on your computer. Fucking incel.
Who the hell downloads porn? That sounds like a great way to fuck up a perfectly good computer with viruses. Plus, trying to put terabytes of anything on a PC would crash it.
So.....not a great guess.
Ah, so it's kiddie porn. Got it. Now fuck off.
You know, you're not exactly dismantling stereotypes of "hysterical women" here. Take a chill pill and maybe go touch some grass.
Interesting essay. Raising a boy, it is concerning to see these trends. I hope more research and attention is given to the subject.
Great article - counter-narrative and insightful. Thank you!
I really love how well adjusted and thoughtful everyone is being in this comment section. Everyone is being so kind and persuasive and not at all weird.
That’s what I get for opening up comments to all. Sorry! Should I remove our feminist friend?
Not that I don’t enjoy being called a “ball-palming cunt”….
I mean, it is a very colorful moniker!
It’s up to you, but I think it’s one of those situations where you might not want to interrupt someone who’s helping you make your point.
It's kind of sad that the same people who complain about "misinformation" also believe the wage gap is a real thing.
It IS real. I've had access to enough payroll records to personally verify it for myself.
It's consistently driven by other non-gender factors, like amount of OT worked. Men statistically work longer hours, which one way or another leads to higher pay. Ever compared the timesheets along with the paystubs? When a woman is working 35 hours a week while a man in the next cubicle works 55 hours a week, it's not a "gender gap" that explains the man getting larger raises and bonuses.
FWIW, it was a woman named Claudia Goldin who did the most research into non-linear wage growth. (she won the 2016 IZA Prize by the Bonn-based Institute for the Study of Labor based on that research) If working a 40 hour week brings in a salary of $50k, an 80 hour week (i.e. double the hours) tends to bring in closer to a $120k salary (i.e. MORE than double the pay). Men statistically working the lion's share of longer hours also means men tend to get bigger raises, bigger bonuses, and more rapid promotions.
https://www.socialsciencespace.com/2022/12/claudia-goldin-on-the-gender-pay-gap/
https://dataspace.princeton.edu/handle/88435/dsp01zc77ss46f?mode=full
And that’s without considering socioeconomic factors. White educated women make significantly more, on average, than black men. It’s not a cut and dry issue with a clear solution as some would have it be.
When a person thinks their "personal experience" amounts to scientific research, that's the end of the conversation for me. But good for you for taking the time to explain lol.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/19/women-are-still-paid-83-cents-for-every-dollar-men-earn-heres-why.html#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20a%20recent%20analysis,%2C%20geography%2C%20race%20and%20ethnicity.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/25/gender-pay-gap-facts/
https://www.aauw.org/resources/research/simple-truth/
https://www.epi.org/publication/what-is-the-gender-pay-gap-and-is-it-real/
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/quick-facts-gender-wage-gap/
https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/gender-pay-gap
My sources are better than yours, and I can do this all day, penis. Die mad about it.
That Pew one comes right out and says "Much of this gap has been explained by measurable factors such as educational attainment, occupational segregation and work experience.", which the others also agree on. A women making lattes at Starbucks and getting paid less than a man working as an electrical engineer isn't being discriminated against.
The closest they get to claiming actual confirmed discrimination is "overrepresented in lower-paying occupations", which is a combination of choosing shitty paying jobs like baristas and the self-inflicted glass ceiling effect of working less OT over their careers than men, who leverage that OT to get promoted. All other discussions of discrimination are heged in "may be a factor" terms, but there isn't even an attempt to quantify it.
So yeah, men getting paid more for equivalent work is fake news. If it worked that way, capitalists would exclusively hire women to save money and increase profits.
Oh right, Forbes and Business Insider are all fake news. Fuck off, dick. The wage gap exists.
In the sense that baristas get paid less than engineers, sure there's a gap there.
Fuck your blogs. Goldin is a ball-palming cunt, like our friend Sarah Haider here. Trying to score brownie points from dicks because they believe the hype that it's a post-feminist world, and no one will read her unless she peddles the narrative about "restoring balance".
Always heartwarming to see women supporting other women by calling them "ball-palming cunts" on the internet for being a prize-winning economist. Truly a win for feminism.
I don't support women who protect knuckle-draggers like you.
You have no idea how funny I find it that I, an accountant, am being called a knuckle-dragger. Accountants have plenty of stereotypes, but that generally isn't one of them.
I also think it's funny that you think I'd need Goldin to "protect" me. I'm one of those guys who worked 80+ hour weeks for 7 years to lock in the fat salary I'm currently getting paid. I met tons of smart women along the way, but they pretty consistently negotiated with employers in very different ways than I did. They prioritized work-life balance and boundaries, while I sacrificed those things for higher pay.
I have two white sons and this is my fear for them. In trying to level the playing field for everyone else they’ve thrown sons like mine off a cliff. It’s intentional and backed by bad statistics like the wage gap. I’m a woman in a STEM field. I’m not underpaid as compared to my male peers. Freakanomics did a podcast episode years ago about a wage gap study that Uber did and it was pretty interesting. It debunked that $0.75 for every $1 myth as well as showed that men pick risker and therefore more lucrative routes (early mornings, late nights and they drive faster) and that any wage gap (at the time something like $0.97 for every $1) was not due to discrimination but choices.
Taking things away from men intentionally to prop up women isn’t feminism, it’s revenge.
It's funny at my company (semiconductor industry) if I got a black woman hired I would get 5 grand bonus for no other reason then them being black and a woman. If they were merely woman it would be 4 grand.
The notion that stem is discriminating against women is laughable to me when they will pay rather large referral bonuses to get women hired. You think there might be other positive discrimination at play? like illegal quotas?
Ugh, don't get me started on the advantages boomer men have over millennial/Gen Z men.
Refreshingly insightful article on gendered financial inequality. Your points about men being more likely to be given loans and investments due to their perceived financial stability and men being given gifts to demonstrate their value or worth are clear examples of how societal expectations and biases can lead to unequal treatment and opportunities for men and women.
It’s really interesting how the ways in which this gendered financial inequality can have long-term consequences on individuals and their financial stability. It's not just about receiving a one-time gift or loan, but rather the accumulated financial support and opportunities that can lead to greater financial success.
Your bringing attention to this important issue is appreciated, and I hope more will recognize and address these inequalities to foster a more equal opportunity and a more fair society for all.
Did we read the same article? I WISH your take was what Haider was trying to express. It looked to me like she was drinking Reeve's koolaid by the kegful. Your comments are excellent. I hope someone pulls her out of the rabbit hole before it's too late...
A related tangent: it is commonplace these days to see a list of finalists for annual book awards, or of "year's best" books, dominated by women, often nonwhite, together with some nonwhite men; see for example the National Book Award finalists at https://www.vox.com/culture/23437466/national-book-award-2022-winners-finalists-list, the NY Times list of ten best of 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/books/best-books-2022.html, or its recommended of 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/08/books/review/2022-reading-picks-from-times-staff-critics.html. And there are a variety of prizes for books by women, and none, I think, for books by men (only). It could well be the case that men, especially white men, don't write so many prize-worthy books these days, or that it's time to spotlight other voices, for some indefinite period. But it's a curious situation. Similar comments apply to music as well.
Good read. I have always been very intrigued in how far the pendulum of "Corrective Action" swings. For centuries, women were barred from going into certain fields, especially STEM. Now it seems that the corrective action isn't just to facilitate our entrance into the field, but it's beginning to feel more and more forced. More about signaling than actually caring. Thanks for pointing that out. If only people can see that.
Does our culture *hate* men? Our culture is certainly allowed to *signal* they hate men but maybe there's no difference in that distinction?
Exactly. Refusing to give scholarships to men born after 2000 but then only promoting older men in the workplace doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
Hi, I enjoy your writing and think this essay raises good points.
I wonder if the higher variance in male IQs explains some of the academic discrepancy between men and women. Males seem to have a higher proportion of individuals at both tails of the bell curve.
Also, men tend to do poorer in coursework but better on high-stakes test such as the SAT, which may be due to personality traits. On average, boys outscore girls on the SAT but are clobbered on the achievement-oriented GCSEs.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886906000420?via%3Dihub
https://19thnews.org/2022/03/colleges-admissions-dropping-sat-exam-gender-gap/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/282484/gcse-pass-rate-in-uk-by-gender/
Are you taking the piss? Boo hoo for men.
2 things can be true at the same time. The system can be rigged in favour of Boomer men while also being rigged against young men.
What the fuck did I just read? I hope you were being facetious. The reason more women are going to college is NOT because of more scholarships being given to women, or that man-hating activists have taken over academia. It's because WOMEN have ALWAYS had to work harder than men to get into college, and with some of the OBSTACLES removed, women are no longer SHUT OUT of college, except where colleges actually cheat and give men an undeserved advantage on entrance exams.* Women are finally free to excel without apology. And men are STILL trying to rip our achievements out of our hands, and cry "Foul!" when a woman takes something to which men feel entitled. It's sounds like challenging male entitlement chafes you. Why? Are you a male supremacist? Do you believe that men SHOULD be given priority in every context?
You claim "...male students are at a higher risk of dropping out of college than any other group..." DROPPING OUT is entirely their choice; they aren't being KICKED out of school, and no one else has any obligation to keep these men interested in their own betterment. Perhaps they resent having top honors go to women- where they should have ALWAYS belonged. I was the top student of my EMT program. The males who flunked the course the previous year were allowed to retake it, and they demanded to have their 2nd attempt scores counted against the 1st-time scores of the current A students (all female), and succeeded in bumping the women out of the honors we worked for and deserved.
Men still receive massive financial packages in the form of sports sponsorships - they are being courted by professional sports teams from the second they set foot on campus. None of the women's sports benefits are comparable. Very few women can build a professional career, much less become a multi-millionaire, from playing sports. Now mediocre (and aging) male athletes are being allowed to join women's teams for a second shot at glory- at the expense of the women's achievements and opportunities. Men are USED TO being indulged in this manner. That doesn't mean they deserve it, or that we should feel uncomfortable when a woman succeeds. But we often do, because a woman's success is nearly always followed by the complaints of a resentful man who believes HER achievement should have been HIS.
Hardly anything has changed for women in the workplace. If you attempt to use any of the protections set in place to deal with discrimination, "at will" employment laws provide all the loopholes any employer needs to remove you. Upper management and executive jobs still go almost entirely to men, even at companies that claim to embrace diversity.
It's only natural for more women to seek higher education when we know how impossible the work force will be for us while men still run EVERYTHING. I shouldn't be surprised that you think it's unfair for women to have any tiny lead over men, when you are in deep denial about the wage gap. Consider what it means to have more women than men in college- do men actually lose anything? They have no problem getting IN to school. They are leaving by their own choice. So what do men actually lose, when they will still be prioritized when they enter the workforce, and why should ANYONE care about this one statistic, especially a member of the demographic that these poor entitled manbabies will oppress for the rest of their lives?
"Women who wish to “break barriers” in STEM can look forward to diving into a mountain of money, but men who wish to do the same in a profession like Speech-Language Pathology (90%+ female) can look forward to nothing of the sort. " THIS IS PROOF OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN! This IS the smoking gun! Male-dominated fields PAY MORE because the paycheck has traditionally gone to a DICK. How do you not get this?
"The steady decline of male-exclusive clubs and associations might be, at least in this sense, a bad thing." Apparently, you have no interest in addressing rape culture on campus, or how it leads to a hostile working environment in the future for women. The Greek system should be abolished. For men. Sororities are vital networking resources for women. Men will continue to build their private fiefdoms on the golf course, where they DO have the HIGHER FUCKING SALARIES to afford the country-club memberships. I'm still holding out hope you were being sarcastic.. because if you are earnestly agreeing with a smug misogynist asswipe like Reeves, you're well on your way to becoming a men's rights activist.
*https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3015223/women-outperform-men-after-japan-medical-school-stops-rigging
You are a misandrist. It's sad that this form of bigotry is now considered socially acceptable in our culture. You are contributing to a movement that is causing untold damage, and I hope you recover one day.
Ok, lets take a look in a place where there are no thumbs on the scale: business. When we look at the top males in wealth we find self made men like Musk, Gates, Bezos, etc. When we look at the richest women we find Walton heirs, widow of Steve Jobs, and the ex-wife of Bezos. Not a single self made woman in the top ten. Many of the men in the Stanford class of '94 became billionaires, none of the women. If you read the story of Theranos it is clear how far powerful & rich people will go to push a female Steve Jobs.
The thing is, don't get mad get even. If you're right about the wage gap then you can become very wealthy on the differential: start an enterprise with only women! Although this is not how the richest women made their wealth so there might be more effective ways. Why not?
Your rant shows a deep misunderstanding of how society works. There is no male conspiracy that sets male salaries higher than women. Males are more interested in working with things than women are, and working with things tend to scale better and that makes it more profitable than jobs where you need to interact with people, the jobs more preferred by women.
Then again, reading your rather hysterical reactions I doubt you'd be interested in a fair discussion.
Thank you. My thoughts exactly xx
I appreciate this article and learned a lot from the comments, as well. I didn’t think about the wage gap being a flawed argument until I read a commenter share about how men tend to work more OT hours, leading to naturally higher annual wages. However, what’s missing from this point is something I’ve personally experienced and cannot walk away from this thread without mentioning -- and that’s the issue of career interruptions for women. More woman are impacted by career interruptions, which leads to lower earning potential overtime. Whether they take breaks from their career for childcare responsibilities or elderly parental care, women take on the brunt of this work in a society where universal healthcare or elder-care isn’t available. I’ve personally had to take off over a year from work between my two kids and have been told point-blank during hiring processes that my earning potential is based off of “traditional years in the workforce.” The years I’ve taken off to take care for my kids -- even tho I was writing, volunteering, building, oh and raising human beings -- means nothing for my earning potential and I’ve suffered because of it.