We're going to start evolving penises is what's going to happen. Men will grow vaginas and begin menstruating! Facial hair will fall out! Women will start punching each other to solve problems!
Pandemonium at the upset of nature's natural balance!
I sincerely hope that this administration formalizes a federal contracting set-aside program for woman-owned small businesses. There is a huge number of small WO companies out there slogging through these rough economic times, who are even more highly at risk in financial terms (trust me - financial institutions discriminate). There was a rule proposed last year that was garbage because it was limited to four inconsequential industries. Hopefully it will become obvious to the new crew in DC that helping woman business owners is good for the economy overall.
Of course, once there are more women than men in the workforce, certain people will decry it as an unnatural state of affairs that we must fix. Strangely, these people have not been panicked for the past few hundred years that saw women outnumbered in the workplace.
One angle that I see as a positive on this is that while we recognize that sometimes women make choices that limit their earning capacity for various reasons, society doesn't have a negative reaction to that they way that I think most men get treated for doing the same. Exit the rat race for less money but more time, I think it's more OK for women -- even the women I know who did it without children to care for.
And I know that part of this is the perceived social good of woman having more time for the bebbehs but it is one less stigma women have to tolerate.
Unemployed men's child care duties, by contrast, are virtually identical to those of their working counterparts, and they instead spend more time sleeping, watching TV and looking for a job, along with other domestic activities.
This just makes me so angry. Seriously, some men? Why are you okay with being so useless?
Holy crap, I had no idea layoffs were that disproportionate. This would be a great time for all those men to brush up their domestic skills! Yeah, right.
It just boggles my mind that men who are unemployed do not up the amount of time they spend with their children, nevermind housework. That just strikes me as bad parenting and shows why the goverment is pumping money into ads telling men to spend time with their kids (ads you never would see for women).
Seriously, men of American, WTF? (And yes, I know there are like 4 dudes here).
@clevernamehere: AMEN. I was busy yesterday, do you know what my daughter had for dinner (while in care of my husband)? Fruit. That's it. I got home at 8:30 and had to make her a PB&J. Seriously, he doesn't even try anymore.
@Little Green Frog: That's ridiculous! Even 30 years ago my dad was fixing baby bottles and packing our lunches for school. And my boyfriend is at this very moment pick up his daughter from daycare, and will undoubtedly make her a nice dinner tonight. WTF is wrong with some people?
Why not require some of the estimated $800-plus billion to go toward creating more high-paying jobs in traditionally female fields rather than just any old jobs? Or specify that employers in sectors dominated by either women or men who get federal contracts make demonstrable efforts to fill 10 percent or 20 percent of the jobs with the opposite sex?
The first point is bogus. I don't think the stimulus aims to fill "any old jobs," but jobs that will recreate a needed service or product.
The second point holds more merit, but I don't know that I agree with forced diversity in this situation. Anyhow, I am FAR more worried about older people needing to reenter the workforce or low-income people.
@Penny Plastic (Archetype): Federal contracting is already male dominated, already has more stringent EEO rules and forced diversity, and is male dominated despite it. There are few sectors that receive federal contracts that could be considered "female dominated," and even fewer that offer professional work.
I'm not for forced diversity either, but the federal contracts arena is already sort of proof that it doesn't work.
@Penny Plastic (Archetype): Stimulus money should not go towards making reparations with the gender inequity that exists in pay structures. It should only go towards re-creating infrastructure and the creation of NEW jobs in sectors like "Green Technology", Education and Healthcare.
Since I think women are prime to take-over these sectors, it could be win-win.
Just want to give my husband props - he's about to quit his job and I am certain that his childcare time will increase and mine will decrease. Of course, I don't make enough money to bring home the bacon so we may have to eat the baby and call it a day.
@dreamweave: I wish you all the best with that-it's kind of a scary time to be jobless(I just lost mine), so I really hope that the transition goes well.
@LittleMissBossyBoots: thanks - it is definitely scary. I keep saying I'd rather be poor and happy than financially stable and miserable but that is easy to say right this second while we're reasonably stable and reasonably happy. I'm so sorry about your job - and hope you find a new and better one real quick-like!
I wonder if any of the disparity in the layoff percentages has to do with high-paying employees getting the ax first, which would mean more men getting fired.
@megnificent: The main issue is that layoffs are disproportionately happening in industries dominated by men, such as manufacturing. But you bring up an interesting point...
@megnificent: I would tend to think that, and the fact that the disparity between numbers of men and women in the workforce were previously significant. It also depends on the sector -- one thing the NPR report noted is that female-dominated sectors are much better at weathering the recession than male-dominated ones (health care, nursing, teaching, etc.).
@megnificent: @Penny Plastic (Archetype): Word. The jobs that are taking the biggest hit are dominated by white men, which is why the playing field is about to be leveled in many respects.
And I do think that we are getting closer to equal pay for equal work. But as you said, we make our choices. I don't want to be away from my family at night, so I don't have a job where I will have to. Yes, that limits my money making ability, but so be it.
There are many, MANY reasons for wage disparities between genders. However, I can only hope that as the number of women surpasses men in the workplace, we'll see more female managers and mentors, which will hopefully help lower-ranking women feel more comfortable asking for appropriate compensation. I think this is a key issue in the white-collar world.
Heard this morning that of the number of people laid off, 82% are men, meaning that if this continues, the Unites States may have a workforce with more women than men in it. The Lilly Ledbetter Act came at a very propitious time for working women, because they will need every dollar.
In a way, between the increased pay and the lowered male presence, women stand to make bigger strides in the workplace, assuming some more fair-minded bosses see fit to promote more women as they realize they are as qualified (if not more so) than their male counterparts.
@NefariousNewt: But I wonder if at least some of those lost jobs are because women make less money, so if you have to choose between genders doing similar jobs you lay off the man.
@BrutallyHonestZombies: No doubt. But of course that now opens up the pool of potential candidates for promotion more fully to women, and the Ledbetter Act ensures that they be paid accordingly. I'm not sure an employer can simply jettison high-paid men, promote women to fill their place, and then pay them less than the men were making.
@BrutallyHonestZombies: We can only hope that those women are able to stick it out through the tough times and are rewarded once the economy improves.....
@BrutallyHonestZombies: I do think a majority of the layoffs of men have to do with cost cutting and since men are typically less inclined to take pay cuts, the women remain on board because they are already making less money.
When the economy picks up again (though this will be a long time coming) we'll be in the same boat.
I'll just wait until then to see what happens because in this climate, we are not really dealing with apples to apples per se (yes! I watched South Park "Vampires" last night! per se per se per se)
@Penny Plastic (Archetype): Well, you have to figure that these women will gain experience and time over male counterparts, and if they prove their competence, hiring managers will be reluctant to replace them even when there are qualified male candidates available. Managers don't like change, and they don't like a lot of changes. Look for a lot of these positions to stick.
@NefariousNewt: Without transparency, how are the women going to know what their predecessors were making? Where I work, we're not supposed to discuss pay at ALL.
@NefariousNewt: @BrutallyHonestZombies: BINGO! My thoughts exactly. I have 33 years in my industry and am working for yet another male with 10 years (often more) less experience who makes at least 20% more than I do. When the company laid off staff recently it was mostly male staffers.
Unfortunately we're still paid less and there's often no way of knowing because there's a serious lack of transparency in pay scale.
02/06/09
Pandemonium at the upset of nature's natural balance!
Pandemonium in the streets!!!!!
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
And I know that part of this is the perceived social good of woman having more time for the bebbehs but it is one less stigma women have to tolerate.
02/06/09
This just makes me so angry. Seriously, some men? Why are you okay with being so useless?
02/06/09
Wow...is it just me or are most men just getting lazier and lazier?
02/06/09
02/06/09
Color me freaking shocked.
02/06/09
Seriously, men of American, WTF? (And yes, I know there are like 4 dudes here).
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
The first point is bogus. I don't think the stimulus aims to fill "any old jobs," but jobs that will recreate a needed service or product.
The second point holds more merit, but I don't know that I agree with forced diversity in this situation. Anyhow, I am FAR more worried about older people needing to reenter the workforce or low-income people.
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
I'm not for forced diversity either, but the federal contracts arena is already sort of proof that it doesn't work.
02/06/09
Since I think women are prime to take-over these sectors, it could be win-win.
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
Gotta love those free markets. No really.
02/06/09
And I do think that we are getting closer to equal pay for equal work. But as you said, we make our choices. I don't want to be away from my family at night, so I don't have a job where I will have to. Yes, that limits my money making ability, but so be it.
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
In a way, between the increased pay and the lowered male presence, women stand to make bigger strides in the workplace, assuming some more fair-minded bosses see fit to promote more women as they realize they are as qualified (if not more so) than their male counterparts.
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/06/09
When the economy picks up again (though this will be a long time coming) we'll be in the same boat.
I'll just wait until then to see what happens because in this climate, we are not really dealing with apples to apples per se (yes! I watched South Park "Vampires" last night! per se per se per se)
02/06/09
02/06/09
02/07/09
Unfortunately we're still paid less and there's often no way of knowing because there's a serious lack of transparency in pay scale.