Hacker News Reader

Comment by notadoc | Hacker News Reader

Interesting. Will there be a nationwide push to hire more men to make up for all of this inequality?

"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Not sure what inequality you're talking about, given that the US population is right at a 50/50 split between men and women. Then again, I'm not sure how genuine you're being here.

Presumably they are referring to the healthcare and education fields being over 3/4 women. In my opinion, whether such disparities are problematic, and in which fields, is a genuine question.

I was under the impression there is, within those fields, significant concern about the way men are treated. Males who are passionate about early childcare education are often viewed as dangerous by the parents. Same for male nurses.

Yes, and not to mention that even within those fields there are sub-fields where there are basically no males (e.g. paediatric nurses).

And of course, the persistent retirement gender gap (men and women retire at the same age and are expected to contribute as if they lived the same lifespans, but women live considerably longer).

But, even though these fields are female dominated, aren’t the leadership and most management positions in these fields held by men? Glass escalator theory is an interesting concept that some researchers bring up when studying these disparities.

Looking at 10-year-old numbers, there are more female than male school principals in the US: https://www.statista.com/statistics/238631/us-school-princip...

I'm pretty sure that the numbers are even more skewed now. They are even more skewed at the elementary level, of course, just like the teacher numbers.

In the US, there are 97 men per 100 women.

There are some legitimate concerns related to having basically only women teaching young children, but the issue seems to predominantly be that men don't want to do it.

Has that been studied? A more obvious explanation is that most men don't want to sign up for a career of being regularly (if mostly tacitly) thought of as being pedophiles. It's an awful situation, but I certainly wouldn't recommend this profession for men.

If you doubt this, read some of the (fairly heartbreaking) tales of single fathers of small children. Among other things, they have great difficulty getting their friends' kids to come over for play dates, etc.

I don’t want to get too deep into this - but people said the same thing about science and engineering. It’s a little bit sexist to suggest something like that, though I don’t think that was your intention.

I don’t really think there is any rationale that I’ve seen that convinced me that any job should have any gender ratio split, or that we should increase or decrease such ratios that were scientifically based. There are certainly social or political ones, however.

The over medication of young boys with add medications begins with teachers reporting behavioral issues to parents and suggesting evaluations. I hypothesize men are more likely to empathize with young boys and not see hyperactive behavior as a disorder requiring amphetamines, and that an educational system dominated by women will inevitably pathologize the behavior of young boys while elevating the behavior of young girls.

This immediately raises several questions: 1) What are the legitimate concerns with only women teaching young children? 2) What is the evidence that men aren't interested in teaching young children? How can it be shown that the effect wasn't caused by discrimination? 3-infinity) Same questions, but with any field dominated by one gender

1.) Role models - little boys mimic men cause little kids are gender obsessed. E.g. little boys won't think of being teachers if not seeing them.

2.) There is huge bias and stigma against boy acting girl-like. So yes, at minimum little boy playing with baby will be mocked more then girl playing with car.

I believe (1) is circular: "State X is a problem because it tends to keep us in State X" - but why is X a problem in the first place?

Cause that was example. The "role model for little boys" is general statement. Plus, general diversity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com