To think this is a poor excuse for men not wanting to enter these jobs?

[PrincessSophieFrederike]

I came across this interesting Substack post the other day from a US feminist. She was talking about the lack of men entering professions like veterinary medicine, teaching, library science, etc which are now female-dominated, despite the fact that these were all originally male-only professions. She argues that men are put off female dominated jobs for fear of being seen as less masculine. She had a similar argument for why men are enrolling less in college there.

I also think a factor is that female-dominated workplaces may have on average communication styles which rely more on indirect messaging & ways of expressing conflict, whereas male-dominated workplaces tend to resolve conflict & compete more overtly. Ofc this is a stereotype & not true for many people, but I has some accuracy.

Overall, I do find it a bit of a frustrating excuse. I can understand men who prefer stereotypical male communication styles feeling less comfortable in a female-dominated workplace. Another factor is that women are more likely to promote woke stuff like TRA stuff which many, maybe most, men dislike. (Obvs many women do too, but unluckily women also promote it more). I can also understand concerns about making friends in a female-dominated workplace. (Ofc men & women can be friends, but they might understandably want more men around. Plus a lot of women might be suspicious of a man's female friends- sometimes with good reason.)

I have a lot of sympathy for things like the decline of traditional manual labour & spaces to meet & , the resultant rise in poor male mental health & suicide. But on this issue I'm more sceptical.

Women had to enter plenty of workplaces where until recently they had been legally banned. Sexual harassment is still a big problem in quite a few jobs. Generally women were told to toughen up, for a long time.
Whereas looking up other articles, we're told how men are 'intimidated' by going into a 60% female veterinary class. As I said above, I sympathise with some concerns they might have, but 'intimidated' seems a bit much. Ofc women can be bullies, but I doubt men who enter such jobs will be sexually harassed or seen as less competent due to their sex. Anecdotally, my gran always told me that the few male teachers at the school she taught at were very popular with the female staff. Surely it's similar for other jobs sometimes?

TLDR : AIBU to think it's a bit much for articles to talk about men being intimidated by female-dominated colleges & workplaces, whereas until recently (and some still say this) women were told to toughen up & adapt to male-dominated (and often sexist) ones?

It’s not “instances” it’s studies and data. You are responding to studies and data with “instances” and anecdote.

Your comment on “supply vs. demand” makes zero sense in this context. Why would supply vs. demand be the response for wages falling when an industry becomes feminised but wages rising when it becomes masculinised?

Now “why” it happens is a topic for debate but you are arguing with data and the output of empirical research because you don’t like what it shows.

In Man Made Language, Dale Spender said when women speak 25% of the time, they were seen as having an equal contribution. If they speak 30% of the time, they're seen as dominating it.

That was about speaking in groups, and I don't know if the figures would be the same if it was a study today. But it wouldn't surprise me if they were, and it wouldn't surprise me if it was a similar figures for work-based participation.

I was responding to the poster who said that “as women enter a profession” there is a “steep decline in prestige” which is clearly nonsense in the examples I gave. It’s 1 in 5 at the consulant/partner level but much higher at lower levels with trainees being >50% female in both cases. So in that sense both surgery and city law are most certainly becoming feminised. We can look at medicine (as opposed to surgery) and dentistry in which there are more women overall and there there has not been a drop in wages, with some particularly female-dominated specialisms earning relatively higher than other specialisms.

And if we were to compare across jobs. Mechanical engineering has a far lower female % than law and medicine but is a lower paying and lower status career.

Research?

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2016/04/the-simple-reason-for-the-gender-pay-gap-work-done-by-women-is-still-valued-less/#:~:text=She's%20not%20just%20saying%20this,the%20New%20York%20Times%20writes.

What can possibly explain this persistent pay gap?
Paula England, a professor at New York University and an authority on the gender pay gap, thinks it’s obvious: “It’s not that women are always picking lesser things in terms of skill and importance. It’s just that the employers are deciding to pay it less,” she explained in a different New York Times piece.
She’s not just saying this based on a hunch: along with Paul Allison of the University of Pennsylvania and Asaf Levanon of the University of Haifa, England has carried out one of the most exhaustive studies on the issue. Their findings suggest that women are not necessarily kept out of or choose not to enter high-paying and prestigious professions. Instead, when a job is dominated by women, it’s just not seen as important, and therefore pays less, even if it requires the same skills and education. The New York Times uses the example of janitors versus maids, jobs that are identical in every aspect except gender composition – and pay.

And as women start moving into traditionally male-dominated positions, the pay falls: “A 10% increase in proportion female is associated with .5% to 5% percent decrease in hourly wage in each decade,” the three researchers found.
The world of computer programming is the perfect example. Historically a female-dominated field, men started to take over in the 1980s. And as they did, things changed: “When male programmers began to outnumber female ones, the job began paying more and gained prestige,” Claire Cain Miller of the New York Times writes.

Probably why that PP thinks 20% women in an industry is “female doninated”.

DD is on a primary school teaching degree, there are about 80 in her year. She reports there are 4 young men, and three of them are gay.

As far as primary school teaching is concerned I expect that in Scotland at least,where the job situation is terrible,that this will not encourage men to enter that profession

I found out about Dale Spender from Gloria Steinem's 1970s book. Very good, she should be read more now.

I have to finish some work now but will rey to posts later, looks very interesting!

@JHound if you can get your hands on a copy of ‘Of Marriage and the Market’ I think you would appreciate the case studies! I’ve witnessed it in my own field of law. Formerly mostly women, low status, lower wages. Some significant regulatory changes then occurred that in turn made the field higher profile, and one that companies suddenly needed more expertise in. There was a massive upwards trend in wages for a while as companies
competed for the relatively few people with experience, and suddenly we started getting way more men trying to enter the field. In less than a decade we’ve gone from majority female applicants to my team, to mostly men. I knew it was likely to happen once I knew wages and status were on the increase, but it has been fascinating to observe it in action!

I think it’s because female dominated areas pay less. Men don’t want less money.

I think one reason men seek out higher-paid jobs is that they aware women often want a partner who earns well. I'm not one of them - my husband works in a female-dominated social care environment - but I know many do.

Yes, but they're paid less because they're females dominated.

Think about what's involved in childcare, teaching, nursing - caring for people who may have complex needs, may not be able to communicate well, someone could die in the worst case if you get it wrong. Important work, needs varied skills, training, intelligence. Not as well paid as many other jobs that also need varied skills, training, Intelligence.

What's the more likely reason?

Scientifically proven differences between the male/female brain resulting in the sexes gravitating towards different things or some woman hypothesising that men are intimidated working in female dominated professions?

Pay is largely determined by qualifications and how 'rare' your skill set is.
Anyone can be a cleaner, not everyone can be a brain surgeon.

This!

Men can usually see where the money is going to be. Women (on the whole, not each individually) have a nasty habit of over working for too little money, and not demanding pay rises. Ergo, any profession they dominate will likely be underpaid and under appreciated in short order. So the men do the ‘other’ job that will have money and prestige instead.

@IAmThePrettiestManOnMyIsland My husband works as an adult social worker (unqualified as yet). He works in a large team of nearly all women which he comfortable with. The pay isn't great and he said when he started dating again after his divorce, his job did put some women off - guessing because he definitely is not anywhere near a high earner. It is also not what some women would see as a "masculine" job choice.
For me, the fact that he is in a caring profession ticked boxes, especially as I had two relatively young children when I started dating again. I also felt that he would be able to be more present than a man who was working every hour to earn the big money.
I was right ❤️

You're missing the point though. Stuff like psychology, library sciences, veterinary medicine & primary school teaching used to be all-male

. It was when they became mostly female that men seemed to no longer want to do them much. Suggesting it was the number of women that put them off, not the job.

Or do you think the men who became vets, primary teachers etc before were only doing that because they felt forced to? 🤔

Do you think anyone can be an elder care worker, primary teacher or nursery worker?

Sure, anyone can do the basic skills- but can just anyone do them as they should be done? Would you like your parents or kids to be cared for or taught by just anyone?

This kind of disrespect for those who care for some of the most vulnerable is deeply unhelpful.

I'm not missing the point at all, it's more complexed than simply suggesting 'male flight' phenomena, (which has many reasons in itself) or in the case of this thread, 'men are intimidated.'

Historically, men have dominated most professions. If you go back to 1900 only 6% of married women worked. As demand increased across different sectors women started to fill the gaps, being emboldened by societal changes and able due to easier access to education.

'Suggesting it was the number of women that put them off, not the job.' This may factor in but it isn't really measurable nor is it the sole reason.

'Or do you think the men who became vets, primary teachers etc before were only doing that because they felt forced to?' Could you rephrase your question as I'm not sure what you are trying to get at. Who said anything about being forced into jobs?

I think it takes a caring nature to be a good carer, which is not something everyone possesses. However, you could leave school with nothing GCSEs and walk into a caring role. In terms of qualifications required it is much easier to become a carer than it is to become a brain surgeon. A brain surgeon could do the job of a carer, a carer could not do the job of a brain surgeon, this is why the wages are vastly different.

'This kind of disrespect for those who care for some of the most vulnerable is deeply unhelpful.' What 'disrespect' are you talking about? Stating that unskilled labour is paid less than highly skilled labour is just a fact of life. That's not to say low paid jobs are not valuable to society because they definitely are.

Very much this. There have been some horrible threads where any man in those jobs is pretty much labelled a paedophile.

presume that judgement happens in the real world but isn’t openly voiced as much as it can be on here

No. As industries become female dominated average pay falls and the opposite is true for industries that become male dominated.

Over simpflication to say it’s to do simply with skills.

What is your source for the claim only 6% of married women worked in the 1900s?

One factor may be that previously male dominated sectors and roles tend to be less well paid once they become less so. Not quite sure on cause and effect: if they become less well paid because women enter or women are allowed to enter as they become less well paid. But it's a thing

Overall I hate the idea of an entire sex/gender requiring an "excuse" to not "toughen up" and go into a sector or role they simply don't want. Also most vets are men and veterinary nurses women which mirrors everywhere else in terms of high years and cost of study, high pay and status = mens job vs. low = womens.

You're not completely wrong but there is a fairly substantial minority of people who are outright hostile to men in childcare roles and say that they would not want a man doing personal care or being alone with their child. It comes up from time to time on here.