The gender gap

[Rum]

(EDIT: This follows 42's last post)
There is certainly a 'tradition' of primary school teachers being female. I accept that. I suspect the reasons are to do with the perception of traditional female roles - nurturing, child care and so on being seen historically as female. We live with our own particular set of circumstances after all. I was changing career from social work to teaching and had seen enough of out of control teenagers so I thought I'd go for primary teaching instead.

Which kind of makes the point. Galaxian says it is about 'natural biologically determined' factors, which is utter balderdash. Females are controlled by their circumstances just as I was at that time by mine.

I think (42) that you are misguided about the 'breadwinner' argument. On a level playing field it doesn't matter who earns more - and in schools I often knew of couples teaching in the same school where the woman was on a higher pay scale and it did not appear to be an issue.

As an aside I really hated teaching. Not because of the kids - loved teaching a room full of 7 and 8 year olds..most of the time anyway. It was the fucking national curriculum and the factory mentality that introduced into the profession. I stuck it for a year and then found a job that was asking for social work and teaching qualifications - I never looked back after that.

I wonder if a woman would be more likely to stay in a shit job like that...

I would guess so. In fact, it is exactly what I've seen a few times. Man gets good teaching job, man finds it sucks donkey dick, man does something else instead.

I've also known many women who hate teaching (for much the same reasons as you describe, with the disengaged parents sometimes a larger complaint) but they are still in it. Getting older, and less likely to try anything else.

That must be good for the kids, right? Loyalty, committment and stick-to-it-iv-ness!

I think you've got the issues arse backwards - putting the gender issue first that is. I've known lots of men going slowly bonkers in jobs they hated, too afraid of risk and change to get out and try something new. For what it is worth I made a leap of faith of that sort three times and luckily it paid off..in the end. No guarantee it would though.

[Scot Dutchy]

How many are in work that they really love. I enjoyed programming but my work did not always satisfy but managing to attain a permanent contract I was happy to stay.

[Forty Two]

(EDIT: This follows 42's last post)


I think (42) that you are misguided about the 'breadwinner' argument. On a level playing field it doesn't matter who earns more - and in schools I often knew of couples teaching in the same school where the woman was on a higher pay scale and it did not appear to be an issue.

https://voxeu.org/article/economic-cons ... r-identity

Using US Census data, we also show that within a marriage market over time, when a randomly chosen woman becomes more likely to earn more than a randomly chosen man, the marriage rate declines (see also Watson and McLanahan 2011). This result suggests a potential link between two important social developments over the last several decades: The increase in women’s income relative to that of men and the decline in the prevalence of marriage.

Our estimates imply that aversion to having the wife earn more than the husband explains about a third of the decline in marriage rates over the last thirty years.

While couples seem to try to avoid the situation where the wife earns more than the husband, this situation has nonetheless become quite common. When gender identity norms are violated in this way, the marriage tends to suffer.

Couples where the wife earns more than the husband are less happy, report greater strife in their marriage, and are ultimately more likely to get a divorce.

[Rum]

Not my experience I have to say. I guess we come back to the reasons for this finding. Interesting that the article goes on to say:

"when the wife starts to earn more than the husband, she starts taking on more of the household chores. Perhaps these ‘threatening’ wives do this in order to assuage their husbands’ unease with the situation. The wife, of course, may ultimately get tired of working this ‘second shift’ (Hochschild and Machung 1989), which might be one of the mechanisms behind our results on divorce".

[Forty Two]

Not sure how the wife can take on "more" of the household chores when she's making more than the husband, since we already hear that the husbands do barely any of the household chores when they're making more.

I generally have a bit of skepticism about the household chore data, because it's all self-reported. So, there is a wide difference in what person X includes as a "household" chore, vs a more general "family" chore, etc.

But, anyway, with all the data in this area, it's replete with grey areas. However, in my experience over the last 30 years, one of the things I've heard from women that never changes is that they prefer a man to be "at least" as successful as they are or to have "at least" as good a job/career as they do. Their own level is a floor for the guy they prefer. Now, other things can change the reality - I mean a guy they love can lose his job and their positions swap and she can deal with it. But, it seems to be just that - a woman "deals with" the guy making less or being less traditionally successful.

You don't see a lot of female lawyers winding up with the male paralegal or legal assistant, but you'll a ton of male lawyers winding up marrying their secretary, paralegal or legal assistant or other subordinate personnel. It seems to me to be obvious, at least in American society.

[Rum]

Well you quote a study to support an argument and then dismiss it when you don't agree or like something else it says!

The issue seems to me still very much to be about power and expectations. Men are not giving up their dominance of the workplace and/or domestic life easily, consistently or for many I suspect willingly. Many would give lip service to the notion of a partnership of equals, but perhaps they hold onto the notion that when push comes to shove they need to be ready to be the 'leader'. That may remain the case for a very long time.

[Cunt]

Well you quote a study to support an argument and then dismiss it when you don't agree or like something else it says!

The issue seems to me still very much to be about power and expectations. Men are not giving up their dominance of the workplace and/or domestic life easily, consistently or for many I suspect willingly. Many would give lip service to the notion of a partnership of equals, but perhaps they hold onto the notion that when push comes to shove they need to be ready to be the 'leader'. That may remain the case for a very long time.

Domestic chores are not going to be fair, because people are fucked, not because of gender.

I used to have a boss who was insane (and lovely). She used to lament the failure of the staff to fill the coffee machine reservoir. I watched for awhile, and saw what happened. If someone emptied the reservoir, or found it empty, they filled it, as one normally would. This boss would fill it if there was 1 cup missing. Because of this, she would fill it much more often than others.

Thing is, it didn't matter. She did all that extra filling (and complaining) but no-one was ever in crisis...she could have left it, filling it only when empty, but instead tried to apply her obsession to those around her.

I let her fill it more often, and let her complain. After she left, strangely, it was never a problem again.

If you asked her, you would hear that almost no-one else ever filled the reservoir, and that she 'had to do it herself' most of the time.

So the data is more than a bit slippery.

What is 'fair', and why is it presumed to exist, in domestic chores or anything?

If someone chooses a partner, and stays with them for years while they avoid doing dishes, should we feel sorry for them for 'having' to do all those dishes?

A long time ago, a partner and I were setting up house. I said that I would not be interested in much kitchen, and one pot, plastic cutlery and paper plates were all I would be willing to invest in. Since they were a 'foodie', they insisted on lots of cookware, plates, silver...the whole usual kitchen compliment...creating a bunch of expense and work. Who do you think should bear that cost? Both? Who should do the cooking and dishes?

Needless to say, she was quite put out that I didn't appreciate all her work. Especially when I ate beans or ramen noodles, no matter what she cooked for herself. So was her 2 hours of cooking part of the 'domestic chores'? Was my 20 minutes of cooking and eating also tallied? Should I have done more? Should she have quit wasting hours in the kitchen so as to enjoy more free time?

My bet is that she still spends HOURS SLAVING over a hot stove, for a family that isn't properly grateful for her 'work'. (haven't seen her in decades, but hear that she has a family now)

[JimC]

Shove it up your gender gap, 42!

[Cunt]

Speaking of 'gender gap', is there enough data to see how single parents are doing, and whether there is a difference between male single-parents and female single-parents? Could we look to the childrens success and draw any conclusions?

Or is it simply true that if female single parents raise children who are more likely to die young from heart trouble (for example) that it will be blamed on the Patritarchy?

[Forty Two]

Well you quote a study to support an argument and then dismiss it when you don't agree or like something else it says!

Not really. I noted the data on this issue in general, including the data I cited, contains a lot of "grey" areas. It's hard to draw concrete conclusions either way. However, it can be noted that some data is more concrete than other data -- i.e. how much people make is pretty concrete, and what jobs they do is pretty concrete, but "who does more of the household chores in your home?" is a rather nebulous and subjective issue at heart. I hope you see my point on that.

The issue seems to me still very much to be about power and expectations. Men are not giving up their dominance of the workplace and/or domestic life easily, consistently or for many I suspect willingly.

I suspect many men do not perceive their own dominance. I suspect most men just perceive themselves as doing what they can to get along, and doing the best they can to support their families. Sometimes in discussing this issue, it is forgotten that women are not outside of society, the object of society's oppression, with society being a patriarchal hierarchy that dominates the outsiders. Women and men are both part of society, and they both participate in the "social construction" and they both have expectations and areas in which they exercise dominance. It's not a black and white dynamic.

Many would give lip service to the notion of a partnership of equals, but perhaps they hold onto the notion that when push comes to shove they need to be ready to be the 'leader'. That may remain the case for a very long time.

And, that may be true, but it may not be merely the dominance of men who demand to be leaders, thereby pushing women to the back. There are small events in everyday life that are not necessarily driven by men that also push in that direction. For example, who drives as between a male and female couple? You know, in my circle of upper middle class folks, it is almost invariably that guy that is driving the car when you run into another couple or meet at a party/event. It's odd, but we have a regular monthly dinner with a circle of 5 couples - 10 of us meet for dinner about once a month. I can never remember a time when we went out to dinner where my wife drove. I can not remember a time of meeting friends arriving at the same time, and seeing the wife driving. Most of my friends have joked that their wives try their hardest not to fill up the car with gas, preferring to wait for the husband to do it. The driving and the gas - not because the guy demands it. Women still want the door opened.

Just small things. But, the leader drives, doesn't he or she?

And take when things have to be dealt with around the house. In my circle of friends, it's the guy who deals with fix it people, contractors, finance people, and repairs around the house. That kind of thing.

I think there is certainly a culture which delineates roles for men and women. Yes. But i don't think it can be all chalked up to men improperly dominating to the exclusion of women.

[Forty Two]

The "Consumer Purchase Gap" -- women account for 85% of all consumer purchases, and 93% of all OTC medication purchases, and 65% of all new car purchase decisions.

The "Travel Gap" -- women make 70% of all travel decisions for a couple/family.

The "healthcare decision gap" -- women make 90% of all healthcare decisions for a couple/family.

https://girlpowermarketing.com/statisti ... wer-women/

[JimC]

When we go out to dinner, my wife drives, because she hardly drinks alcohol (1 glass of white at the most, often only soft drinks), which allows me to drink like a fish!

[pErvinalia]

Then you have misunderstood how the world operates. Nature is red in tooth & claw; nothing we can do about that.
Tonight, when you go to bed think about what selection pressure has brought about, and continues to select for, psychopathy. Won't say more.

Nonsense. We are far less violent now than we were in the past. That's what being civilised means.

Again, you do not see the facts in front of your face. Galaxian is speaking of the pinnacle of the control pyramid. You see only its vulgar base. Neither will I pander to the rewriting of the common vernacular...by design: Emasculate is gender neutral, as is 'mankind'. If it is going to change, it will have to do so gradually, not at the behest of some soy-boy or the 75 self-selecting SJW QRSTUVWXYZ+++ so-called 'genders'.
Remember. In the final analysis: 'There's no Mercy. There's no Justice. There is only Natural Selection!" _Galaxian

Naturalistic fallacy.

[pErvinalia]

Also, take the jobs that men are not allowed to do, such as primary school teacher, day care staff, most nursing. Yes, yes, I know that "by law" they are allowed, but in reality, in the 'real' world they are frowned on & so excluded...

Plus ça change. I trained as a primary school teacher. The reason these occupations which are 'frowned upon' if men perform them are that way because they are 'naturally biologically determined'? Jesus your capacity for posting garbage knows no bounds.

Well, good for you. But one swallow doth not a spring make...
Your capacity for functional literacy is questionable, as is your capacity for research:
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rende ... 554b5105d5
"But when you consider the zeal of anti-men critics in this country and their myopic mission to dismantle masculinity, it makes perfect sense that we have skidded to this juncture.
"Forty years ago, in 1977’s heyday of Her Majesty visiting our shores and Elvis dying, men made up 28.5 per cent of primary school teachers.
"This week, the first national study of teacher numbers revealed that has dropped to 18 per cent."
In the USA it averages at 10.5 %
Worldwide average is also dropping: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQp91d0V4AA18zR.jpg

In the UK it is also dismal: https://www.ielts-mentor.com/images/wri ... achers.png


I hope that you did better preparation for your classes than you do for this forum

You said men aren't allowed to be primary teachers. So are they or aren't they?

[pErvinalia]

Maybe it's a trait of you MRA's...

What's the count up to now?