4 ms·
This is not the gotcha you think it is. Sibling already pointed some things out. Specifically for doctors, go ahead and look up what specializations men go int
by BlargMcLarg 4y ago
This is not the gotcha you think it is.
Sibling already pointed some things out. Specifically for doctors, go ahead and look up what specializations men go into primarily and what specializations women go into primarily. The only high paying one I noticed being particularly female-dominated is dermatology, and it's not that much of a difference. The male-dominated specialties tend to have far more high earning specializations, and the ratios are far more skewed too.
As for lawyers, I can't speak except for the fact lawyers work more akin to salesmen and make a lot of money based on performance, and once again, historically speaking, men have always dominated on anything performance-based. Law is an exception, and it's an extremely poor one at that.
As for both, both medicine / biomedical sciences and law pale in comparison to every other field known to both pay well and do so with high security still being largely in favor of men, whereas fields with low pays and low security tend to be dominated by women. Most STEM fields women dominate aren't known for paying well compared to the ones men dominate. Comparing those fields to social sciences is a no-brainer. All of this still excludes entrepreneurship and high-paying blue collar work still being dominated by men.
None of this exempts the fact historically, women have never chased money through career nearly as much as men, and have always placed far higher value on a man's status than vice versa. There are cultural reasons why this has changed, and none of those reasons are necessarily pointing towards improvements. We can open this entire can of worms if you so desire, but it will go far too off-topic for this.
- etchalon 4y agoIt has not occurred to you that the historical data shows evidence of bias instead of evidence of choice and that's fascinating.
- BlargMcLarg 4y agoOh please, do yourself a favor and perform a very simple litmus test. Ask how many men are willing to date homeless women and vice versa. What's fascinating is how people are trying to avoid talking about the obvious motivator for men not present in women, and how the slow death of that motivator is affecting things. Take a look in the mirror before trying to subtly call someone ignorant, would you?
- etchalon 4y agoYou are very convinced your 80s stand-up comedy stereotypes are accurate and it's deeply funny.
- dijit 4y agoI'm trying to see the charitable way of interpreting this but all I can see is an intent to emotionally wound someone else. there's absolutely nothing in what you just said that can be considered constructive. the parent was at least trying to make a reasoned point, even if you don't agree with him. This is Hacker News not Prime Ministers Questions. We're here for intellectual curiosity, some measure of vulnerability and open discussion. Calling people bigoted or old fashioned isn't swaying anyone, if anything it will push people away because as soon as someone says "they've got a point there" and there's backlash instead of a rebuttal: you've lost another person.
- etchalon 4y agoI suggested the parent consider the data shows bias instead of choice and the parent responded with an obviously outdated and generalized stereotype. There was not reason in the parent's point, and I believe such arguments have no right to be treated as serious.