CNN/AP: Study: Academic gains for women, stagnation for men

[DeepModem Mom]

Study: Academic gains for women, stagnation for men
Friday, June 2, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Women now earn the majority of diplomas in fields men used to dominate -- from biology to business -- and have caught up in pursuit of law, medicine and other advanced degrees.

Even with such enormous gains over the past 25 years, women are paid less than men in comparable jobs and lag in landing top positions on college campuses.

Federal statistics released Thursday show that in many ways, the gender gap among college students is widening. The story is largely one of progress for women, stagnation for men.

Women earn the majority of bachelor's degrees in business, biological sciences, social sciences and history. The same is true for traditional strongholds such as education and psychology.

In undergraduate and graduate disciplines where women trail men, they are gaining ground, earning larger numbers of degrees in math, physical sciences and agriculture....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/06/02/education.women.ap/index.html

[ThomCat]

1. So why are women still earning less than men for

doing the same jobs?

[Nay]

2. The answer to this question, and to the question of why men are

"losing out" in the quest for degrees, is the same for both problems -- consciously or subconsciously or unconsciously, men think that if women can get the degree, that degree has just proved itself to be undesireable. If women can get that job, that job is undesireable. If women are doing well in school, doing well in school is an undesireable thing to do.

Think about it. Female babies can wear any color -- watch what men do when you try to put a pink onesie on a baby boy. Why the disparity? It is OK for the "lower class" sex to wear the "upper-class" color blue, but it is never OK for the upper class to degrade itself by imitating the lower.

As for jobs, the research reveals that in many ways, job pay is not related to the difficulty, rarity, education level needed, etc., as much as it is related to which sex (or, often, which race) has traditionally occupied the job. Several Middle Eastern rugmaking countries display this pretty starkly--in one country, rugmaking is a male occupation, and thus well-paid and prestigious. In the other country, it's a female job, and they get paid very little and it's a considered a chump job no man would take. Beautiful rugs come out of both places.

Another famous example comes from the former Soviet Union. Soviet physicians, for some reason, were 80-90% women, and just as well-educated as any physician in the US. They were paid LESS THAN MOSCOW BUSDRIVERS, who were all men.

And, of course, when men and women are both doing what is considered a prestigious job, whichever specialty there are more women in will receive less pay, automatically.

Of course, one can conclude that women taking over a lot of areas where men had traditionally kept women out is a good thing no matter what, and I agree. But until we stop being blind to the sexism involved in all of this, there will be no real change. Men will continue to shun education if they persist in feeling they are "too good" to do what women do. Women will continue to be paid less until things become so evened out that the disparity disappears.