Arguably PhDs in those subjects aren't that useful either and they just seem respectable because they've been around a long time. Many things would seem ridicul

Arguably PhDs in those subjects aren't that useful either and they just seem respectable because they've been around a long time. Many things would seem ridiculous if they were brand new but become respectable and accepted through age (see: new religions vs old religions). But in the case being referred to here, it's not just that the subject being studied is ridiculous, it's the reasons she studied it in the first place: https://thoughtcatalog.com/chloe-angyal/2013/10/why-im-getting-a-phd-in-something-that-no-one-cares-about/ https://thoughtcatalog.com/chloe-angyal/2013/10/why-im-getti... Several issues here: 1) She knows nobody cares and studies it anyway. Not a smart move. At least you can argue some people might care about a PhD thesis on the works of Shakespeare. 2) She directly tackles the question you raise and the answer deserves ridicule: "Why study romantic comedies? They’re formulaic and predictable and light and fluffy. Everyone knows how they’re going to end. They don’t mean anything. Why devote years of my life to them when I could be studying The Odyssey" Hmm, good question. Because: "Well, for one thing, I’m interested in stories about women. And all those abovementioned stories, those stories we take so seriously, those 'real' texts, are about dudes." To recap - she admits that she did a PhD in a subject nobody cares about, studying texts that "don't mean anything", for no better reason than because more useful or meaningful texts involve men. In other words - it's gender studies. The stereotype that people with gender studies degrees find it hard to stay employed is being proven true right here.