NYT Article; "As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops"

deathdragon5858 · 2017-04-19T20:00:35+00:00

More competition, and pay drops? What misogynistic voodoo is this?

Samantha_Cruz · 2017-04-19T20:39:17+00:00

the article makes the claim that "Computer programming, for instance, used to be a relatively menial role done by women. But when male programmers began to outnumber female ones, the job began paying more and gained prestige."

When exactly did female "computer programmers" outnumber men?

DaeusPater · 2017-04-19T22:33:17+00:00

Women’s median annual earnings stubbornly remain about 20 percent below men’s. Why is progress stalling?

Because they suck at work! Joking, chill. LOL. On a more serious note, it is because of our society's pressure on men to be the breadwinners. The gap is nothing but a reflection of the fact that, in our society men are treated as nothing more than walking ATMs. As a result men are forced to work harder, longer, better.

Work done by women simply isn’t valued as highly.

Victim hysteria with no evidence.

Women, for example, are now better educated than men, have nearly as much work experience and are equally likely to pursue many high-paying careers. No longer can the gap be dismissed with pat observations that women outnumber men in lower-paying jobs like teaching and social work.

No, they are better educated in the higher paying fields, they are also not equally likely to pursue high-paying careers. Check the statistics. It is still very true that women outnumber men in low-paying jobs, though men far outnumber women in unemployed-ness.

In fact, another study shows, when women enter fields in greater numbers, pay declines — for the very same jobs that more men were doing before. Work done by women simply isn’t valued as highly.

Correlation doesn't equal causation. Garbage level intelligence shown, very disingenuous and dishonest propaganda. If you compare fields over time, when women enter male-dominated fields it is only after those fields have gone viral/established. Since there is a surplus of demand, the value of labor falls down. This is completely explained by looking at the size(over time) of those industries that women are beginning to enter.

The reverse was true when a job attracted more men. Computer programming, for instance, used to be a relatively menial role done by women. But when male programmers began to outnumber female ones, the job began paying more and gained prestige.

Bullshit. Notice that they only found one example to support this. In the 'punch card programming' era, mostly women worked as 'punchers' at data centers. They didn't actually code, they didn't write algorithms, they just punched code sheets into punch cards. It didn't need lots for brain. That doesn't even compare to what the CS/IT industry has become now. False equivalency.

Possibly sexist theory: feminist seem to imply that, when women enter male-dominated industry, they stagnate it or cause it to lose value. Whereas when men enter female-dominated fields they are transformed/rejuvenated/reformed into productive fields.

encouraging girls to be engineers and boys to be teachers. There’s nothing stopping men and women from switching roles and being a maid versus a janitor except for social constructs.

Many men have left careers in teaching, housework, childcare, because there is a massive unjustified mistrust of men and misandry in these fields. This is due to the 'men are rapists/pedophiles' hysteria created by feminism.

Samantha_Cruz · 2017-04-19T19:58:20+00:00

maybe it's just me but I'm not finding the link to the article you are referring to. However I have seen some similar articles from a few months ago and they seemed to totally ignore the fact that adding more immigrants to construction markets causes the pay to drop; adding more immigrants to farming markets causes the pay to drop; adding more H1B immigrants to the IT Field causes pay to drop; those are all expected/totally predictible results of adding more workers to any particular field; a well known and widely understood consequence of supply and demand.

Does the article explain how this is somehow NOT the case when "more women" are added to whatever "male dominated field" they are talking about?

EricAllonde · 2017-04-19T23:36:16+00:00

I've had feminists quote this article at me in wage gap debates several times. I think it's a shoddy piece of research, full of holes, and each time I've asked the feminist if she actually understands the paper and can defend it against my criticisms: silence.

The fact is they don't understand it at all, they just like the sound of the headline and so they splash it around hoping some of the mud will stick.

The computing example is the centrepiece of the case the paper is trying to make, and it's absurd. Here's real story:

In the early days of computers, (mostly male) programmers would write out their code on paper and give it to (mostly female) support staff, who would sit at the keyboards of their card punch machines and produce the card decks that were used to program those simple computers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programming_in_the_punched_card_era

Then we got multi-user systems, individual monitors & keyboards, text editing software and high level compilers. Programmers became far more productive, providing they were able to refocus away from low level coding to thinking about algorithms and letting the compiler do the grunt work. Oh, and they no longer needed anyone to make up card decks of course, so all those women in secretarial roles were out of a job.

But there's nothing stopping women from becoming programmers if they want.

So this example fails to support the claim that "women were forced out of programming when it became more highly paid". Rather the job that most of the women were doing was eliminated by advances in technology, something which can happen to any of us, male or female.

DavidByron2 · 2017-04-20T17:22:40+00:00

If you double the supply and don't increase the demand, cost decreases.

This is obviously caused by sexism against women.

Reastruth · 2017-04-20T06:00:12+00:00

Thank you all for your help in this. The more I re-read this article, the more annoyed I got at the; cherry picked example jobs, lack of sources, and disingenuous example of the female programmer.

After reading the part where she suggest some sort of subtle preemptive discrimination that discourages women from entering male dominated careers (and conveniently ignores women's influence in the same regard) I began to wonder if anyone has done any research into the biological factors that influence career choices. It almost seems obvious that biological factors (hormones and breast milk) that require a woman to be more caring and nurturing - because babies - would be why women gravitate to those fields and not want to build houses or create.

Would anyone know of any sources on this? I'm sick of seeing the "male dominated society influences women's career choices" argument

Title	NYT Article; "As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops"
Author	Reastruth
Upvotes	6
Comments	15
Date	April 19, 2017 7:52 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/66cngc/nyt_article_as_women_take_over_a_maledominated/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/nyt-article-as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated.925191 https://theredarchive.com/post/925191