Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

261–270 of 309 posts

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

#261
post #107
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very true. We definitely are more lenient towards people in different ways depending on their gender, and there are a lot of relaxed social expectations that men have compared to women. Still though, I think there are dimensions of this where this is less true, perhaps in ways that men are expected to seem "confident" or "strong" or "independent" which I think can be stiffing. The typical men's section of a cl…

>perhaps in ways that men are expected to seem "confident" or "strong" or "independent" which I think can be stiffing. Yep, and women demand this too: many women's dating profiles talk about how they want a guy who's "confident but not cocky", who "makes a plan" for dates, who "takes the lead", etc. Basically, American women want hyper-masculine men who look like George Clooney (when younger), but then they sit aroun…

[deleted]

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

#262
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about marriage? If a man makes more money and he is married is HE talking more? Isn't that income split (or in reality spent by the women)? I have never understood why data on married men is treated as if the men are single and it's their money alone.

This is anecdotal, but men I know have more expensive hobbies then women. Men are more eager to buy what they want while women save money more and feel bad about unnecessary purchases. Think gaming equipment, steam sales for games they will never play, flying, cars, tech, 3d printer and what not. Compared to that, feminine hobbies are few bucks once in a while.

Consumer spending is 85% female. https://girlpowermarketing.com/womens-purchasing-power/

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

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe we need an acceptable way for people who can't mentally handle work to be able to exist in society. I initially felt on-the-fence about this but upon further thought I absolutely disagree with the idea. Society works and thrives when we've a common goal (all working to make things slightly better for everyone one bit at a time) and honest reciprocal agreements as one. I am happy to partake in a society where t…

Holy privilege Batman! > unless safeguards were put in place to ensure their malignant genes stopped with them at the end of their days. As if it’s their genetics and not their disenfranchisement from society that makes them want to drop out. We allow cheap foreign labor to displace these people, if we had stricter immigration I can guarantee that there would be less people in poverty, business would have to pay more…

> Plenty of people put in a lot and don’t get much back. Just because life worked out great for you—you put in effort and saw a return—doesn’t mean it works that way for everyone. I personally worked my ass off for 5 years and then got screwed out of my work by people with more money.

Dude, I worked especially hard for 13 years and got screwed badly. You are lucky that you got that knowledge in 5 years that hard work does not equate to anything and did not waste a lot of time.

Most of the people who graduated with me found loopholes in the system and are more successful exploiting it. Very few people took hard work route and even less became successful. (Note: I am not from the US)

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

#264
post #73
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?

> What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier? Committing suicide? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle... https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/ It's a horrible observation, as men are obviously in crisis. There's a large percentage of working age men not in the labor force too. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS15000001 https://www.bls.gov/opu…

It’s sad not seeing this get more attention in today’s politics.

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

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, so women make up the majority of the non-farm labor force, but the labor force participation rate is 12% higher for men? How does that work? Are 12% of men either in the military or on disability? Or what?

2.3 million men are in prison in USA. The definition is “divided by the total noninstitutionalized, civilian working-age population.” As a counter-example, average IQ at the workplace is 110. Where’s everyone under IQ90? Injured, suicide, drug addicts etc.

Average IQ is [1]98 and decreasing. Don't think it would be statistically possible for everyone to have 110 as IQ in workplaces.

[2] For your other claims about low IQ. It is "correlated" with lower lifespan (bit different than what you claimed but causes are similar) since you didn't cite.

You can find studies explaining high IQ with differences in environment or income and others point to genes. Some studies claim the choice of [3]toys your kids play with correlates to their IQ and success in life while others ask you to find a good genetic match.

Depending on which camps you are in, IQ could be highly related to the poor condition of the society.

* -15 points for not getting a healthy diet and regular health check ups in your childhood.

* -15 points for lack of proper education, social and family structure in your childhood.

* -17 points for mental health problems, unemployment, poverty and limited freedom after you become an adult.

Those issues overlap with each other regardless of IQ. Although, you can argue Intelligent parents can change these outcomes and if you believe IQ is heritable, then it makes perfect sense. You can use that to explain your bias.

Historically, evidence has been carefully crafted to promote products, services, aristocracy and many other things. I believe a lot happens now too with a different vector (China manipulating their averages) so I think IQ is not a good metric for looking down on people and explaining other circumstantial problems.

1] https://www.healthline.com/health/average-iq

2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/research-confirms...

3] https://www.parentingscience.com/intelligence.html

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

#266
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.

Farm work much of the time is ephemeral. There is a small window for goods to be picked. There is a small window for the tractors to be up kept post or pre harvest/planting. And, as others have said it can be a paper money transaction business.

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

#267
post #53

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.

I agree with Esther Perel's thinking[1] that the next century is going to involve a broadening on what society deems a positive life is for straight, cis men. In the same way that we consider it acceptable for women to express themselves or live differently than the gender roles of the past, I think we'll start to do the same for men. I already see this with my millennial or genZ peers. It's not uncommon to read comm…

Few things to be said here as I think this comment is unbelievably misguided.

Much like how first wave feminism was a response to advanced in pressure vessels producing distilled alchohols, and second wave was a response to the obsolescance of muscle in manufacturing, so too is 3rd wave feminism the response to the key technologies of social media and contraceptives.

We've replaced the concept of a couple investing in eachother from a young age to build a nuclear family with college, debt and a status symbol competition; Social media and dating apps have cast relationships and sex as something that you purchase like a product, and they advertise to women that they too are a product, and that they are more valuable than 90% of men. When you remove the risk of STD's and pregnancy, advertise to women that the ability to act like a masterbation toy improves their "social worth" with no consequences. It's a disgusting trade but it has prooven unbelievably effective. The business model of OKCupid is to dissaude their audience from viewing relationships as investments so they instead invest time in OKCupid. Many women have shut themselves off from men approaching them entirely until they can fully vet them online first. The flip side of this is the "top dogs" become unbelievably pessimistic about, and often abusive of, women.

Today a newborn male child has a 1 in 2 shot at procreating (US Census data for Males never married, no children; look at the growth rate); that's 60 to 100 million men, TODAY, who are in search of a purpose in their lives that won't be fulfilled by a family. Ever. Replacement fertility is 2.1 births per women; we're at 1.7. When the USSR Collapsed they were down to 1.3. The dislocation this has produced is absolutely massive and is what is behind birth rate declines in western countries.

What nobody wants to talk about is how much of a powderkeg that will become when those men reach the end of their economic and reproductive utility and determine, rightfully so, they have been been screwed over. The reason you get the CEO of cloudflare blanning white supremacist material isn't because he REALLY hates those kinds of people; it's because the population is becoming a powderkeg and group identity politics is a VERY bad way for that to go. Every revolution has been predicated upon the concept of society losing it's concept of self-respect and dignity, and so devoid of those concepts, unable to engineer them into the solutions they impliment. After the french killed the aristocracy, they engaged in the reign of terror.

No amount of engaging in psychological warfare exercises selling information pollution such as the concept of a "CISGender" or taking down websites is going to change billions of years of evolution or the consequences of bad policy. I'm all for studies on sexuality but they have to be realistic; it is, like psychology, a complex topic.

If you like malthusianism, the approach of allowing the next wave of feminism take it's toll is about as tactful of a way of going about doing it as using a AAMRAM to kill a baby. The kind of generational complex trauma and resulting child maldevelopment this is going to create is not what suites any kind of functioning society well; all you have to do is look at the chicago ghetto's and the never-ending cycle of violence to understand that. The Chinese with their 1 child policy is far wiser for contrast. Think about it; you allow nuclear families and hey they really invest a heck of a lot into that one kid with the government stepping in to ensure it works out.

As far as the roles go in relationships, the correct way to look at it is, the two people in the relationship make the decisions, and if you have something to say about it, go to hell.

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

#268
post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The family farm model died out decades and decades ago fwiw.

It changed, there are still farm families.

There are still family farms BUT they are farms where you have multiple people in the family that have gone to university, even have masters, phd, law degrees, business degrees.

They don't treat it as a family farm anymore. What people used to call a family farm year/decades ago is now more likely classified as a hobby farm.

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

#269
post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Men take for granted that we all are roughly the same shape, so most of us can shop at the same stores. As a trim, broad-shouldered 5'2" guy, I had to laugh at your entire comment. I have literally never found a shirt or jacket that fits off the rack from... dozens? Hundreds? of different brands. My bet is that you fall into a conventionally masculine body shape, and you universalize your own experience to all men.

I'm 6' tall and I have trouble many times finding shirts to fit these days, because they seem to be cut for fatter men than myself (I'm rather thin). Most shirts and other tops seem to be really baggy to me.

Your best bet is to find some kind of East Asian brand(Uniqlo or H&M for example but they are fast fashion tier places so I'm not actually recommending those specifically) where smalls are actually small and fit nicely on smaller frames.

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

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women tend to choose jobs that pay less. They're on average more interested in people, so they tend to choose to become nurses, teachers, etc., while men are interested in things and become software developers, engineers, etc. I have no idea why income HAS TO be distributed equally. Unless you want to force women to become software developers..? But why.

No, men decided to pay less for jobs often chosen by women.

Economically, that doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

If a business pays employees more than the market rate, it will be less profitable and thus more likely to fail. If a business pays employees less than the market rate, it will lose employees to competitors and it is thus more likely to fail.

Also, to say that "men decided" is pretty strange. It suggests a conspiracy, and it suggests that there are no women who could start companies or otherwise be in management.

Post reply on HN