I find the topic interesting, but the article looks to be doing a lot of guessing causation from results. I.e. In low-skilled jobs that are projected to have

I find the topic interesting, but the article looks to be doing a lot of guessing causation from results. I.e. In low-skilled jobs that are projected to have growth, women are more represented than men. It then wanders around different topics - effects on heterosexual relationship when "eligible" members of one sex are in low supply, etc. But I was most interested in that initial argument, and it wasn't given much support. " Everywhere you look in Tallulah there are women working: in the motels that cater to passing truckers, in the restaurants that serve all-you-can-eat catfish buffets, in shops, clinics and local government offices. But though unskilled men might do some of those jobs, they are unlikely to want them or to be picked for them." In my mind, there's a big difference between "not wanting" and "wanting but not getting", but the article lumps those together. All in all, a great article for raising some theories, and the facts offered point out some questions we might not have had, but precious little evidence of any particular answers, just evidence to shoot down a few theories (and those disproven theories aren't covered). Not to say I think the article's suggestions are WRONG...I just don't have any reasons from the article to think they are right.