Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 309 posts

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#91

Post by tenpies »

virtuous_signal wrote: post #79
cblades wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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).

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#92

Post by ericmay »

djohnston wrote: post #71
notadoc wrote: post #58

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

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.

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.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#93

Post by danbolt »

bitL wrote: post #39
phkahler wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier? Some are living in their parents basement until they're 30 to 40. It has been hypothesized that with the breakdown of families in the US, men are giving up, and that includes efforts to build a stable foundation for their family. See MGTOW but dont read too much, it can be kind of depressing.

Do you think US is moving towards Japan? I.e. a significant population of herbivore men (60%?) that get no benefit from associating with women, losing this motivational signal and dropping out of society?

Honestly, I can't blame a lot of these men for feeling that way and not wanting to feel like they're repressing themselves. In some ways Japan's gender roles can be quite conservative, and I wouldn't blame someone for saying it's not for them.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#94

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

bitL wrote: post #65
baddox wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admit that I haven't read much on the subject, but it feels to me that, at least in American society, it has long been considered more acceptable for men to have various social arrangements than for women. My impression is that it's considered far more acceptable for a man to be working and unmarried well past the average marriage age than for a woman. Compare the words "bachelor" and "spinster."

I think that comes from biology, many men can have children in their 70s, most women have problems past 35 (my piano teacher almost died in the age of 41 while giving birth, 3 years ago). Maybe medicine in the future would allow it, but as far as nature goes, there are different limits.

>many men can have children in their 70s

Just because you can have an erection and produce sperm at 70 doesn't mean you can have children and if you do they'll most likely suffer from down syndrome or other conditions.

Having kids after 45 as a male carries risks for the children as well.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#96

Post by irrational »

deeg wrote: post #3

I find this fairly astounding. The typical stay-at-home parent is the mother and while it's getting closer to parity I don't think it's anywhere near even. For that reason alone I would expect more men in the work force. What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier?

Playing video games, watching porn, etc.? At least a lot of the articles I see about men leaving (or never entering) the workforce - entertainment seems to be the main way of filling up their time.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#97

Post by tomp »

mffnbs wrote: post #66
nkkollaw wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. Aren't there laws that prevent discrimination on gender and race pretty much in every first-world country? That would make it illegal to pay a woman less for the same job. If you consider jobs where the title is the same but the professional works B2B, maybe women are less likely to ask for a better pay? That's why pink razors cost more, after all. Female soccer players make less money because less people watc…

> Female soccer players make less money because less people watch and there is less money I think this is a great example! The US women's soccer team is better than the men's but they make a fraction of the money. It's not their fault that sports have a sexist history that influences viewership, ad revenue, and ultimately their salaries.

It's not "sexist history", it's just that men are better at (almost all) sports. Male football is simply more exciting to watch (I imagine, for broader audiences... it's boring to me, in general). For modeling, it's the reverse.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#98

Post by watwut »

virtuous_signal wrote: post #89
djohnston wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#99

Post by jrumbut »

Ohn0 wrote: post #24
css wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> obtaining accurate farming employment numbers is complicated by: - Self-employment - Unpaid family employment - Part-time or hobby farmers - Other partnerships https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2019/july/nonfarm-payr...

Isn't the true for other industries as well though, not just farming?

That is likely true, though there are some special, farm only ways to be employed such as the H-2A Visa of which there were 2.4 million in 2018 if I'm reading this right: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-labor/#h2a.

My guess is the biggest reason that non-farm labor is tracked is because someone decades ago decided to do so and now if we want to do longitudinal comparisons we need to track the same thing.

It's an interesting enough statistic since there are areas that are very heavily agricultural and areas with very few farms and probably not as much mixing between the two compared to (for instance) manufacturing and clerical jobs which may happen in the same building.

Re: Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

#100

Post by missosoup »

shiado wrote: post #80

The labor force participation rates for men and women are currently at 69.2% and 57.7% respectively. They arbitrarily exclude farming positions but cite mining, logging, manufacturing, transportation, and warehouse roles traditionally occupied by men. This article doesn't really seem to paint a full or accurate picture.

So the total labor force participation rate is ... 126.9% ?

edit: ok, ok, I got confused with the wording, I get it, you can stop hammering with downvotes. I'll leave the above up as my mark of shame.

Post reply on HN