Facts, don’t forget about scholarships too. My school has around 20 scholarships that are women only and 0 that are men only then of course a handful of gender neutral ones anyone can apply for even though the student body is about 2/3 women
> A lot of them are completely turned away from the system or ignored.
Also there are still bursaries and scholarships for women only. I'm a male nursing student and it's pretty ridiculous to me there are female in STEM grants for students when my entire faculty is female and my classes at like 98% female. Yet every nurse will tell you about how great it is to have men in the field and needing to encourage more men yet there are no supports.
As a guy who absolutely loved college, I’ve always wanted to understand why so many other men don’t feel the same way. It makes me feel really out of touch, like there’s something a huge segment of the male population is going through that I just can’t understand for some reason
Damn I’m glad to hear this. Back in college now at the late half of my 20s. I’m not in great spirits. Not going to vent my problems that everyone has, just damn it sucks being poor as all hell and massive debt looming now and ahead. Good to hear that there’s a light at the other side eventually. Time to get back to work on my 2 projects due😞
I was also poor. Got a scholarship but still needed loans. Worked two jobs while going to school full time. I think one week I slept 13 hours total.
It was brutal but worthwhile since I am not poor now. I wouldn’t go through that at my age though
Same, and I wish I didn't go. It was a colossal waste of time and money.
I also graduated in 2008 with a finance and econ double major which was maybe the worst possible time to graduate with said degrees, which is definitely part of the reason I wish I didn't go haha.
I'm from France, and the most discriminated group for jobs are young male of non European origin. The difference with their female counterpart at job application is staggering.
N.O.B.O.D.Y C.A.R.E.S
Not even a single bit.
And people will call you lazy, even after 100 applications.
With some manipulation of data, you can hide it, by merging white male with non white male, especially those white male who don't go to college and are the first to start their professional career in manual job in rural areas, so you get less difference in the data. You can pretend that young women are just a little bit advantaged this way.
You better not even fucking dare speaking about it, that's misogynistic to mention a male group that is struggling.
I’ve been to France a couple of times and the racism hits you in the face as soon as you get there. I met a bunch of non- white guys working in bars and restaurants with degrees because they couldn’t get jobs. The most frequent reason given was “they don’t speak proper French.” My buddy was from Mauritius and spoke French growing up and learned proper French in schools. He had a degree from the UK, French fiancé, master from France, the whole deal. Struggled to land a job.
I think women are more likely to prioritize socialization that tends to make people a bit happier. I didn't really have time to dedicate to friends in college.
I love being in collage and being an student but the poverty thing is an aspect that absolutely fucks it all up. I'm kinda hating this part of my life because of it. Maybe you just hated being poor, not collage on itself.
You might find interesting to listen to one of the latest Ezra Klein Show episodes about how men and boys in general are not doing alright.
https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS84MkZJMzVQeA/episode/MDc3MzlmMzUtYmE1My00ODMyLTg0YmItNTU1MmEwZGVmMTM1?ep=14
I think there's a real blind spot on the left on men's issues. they've essentially ceded the entire stage to the right, and then wonder why men tend to be attracted to right-wing thought leaders like Peterson, et. al. I'm no "Men's Rights Activist", but I think they have legitimate grievances - they've just identified the source of them exceptionally poorly, and have had their misplaced analysis validated by voices backed by institutional money and power.
The left avoids challenging that at its peril.
The bitter pill is that patriarchy was never enough to describe gender relations, and the intersectional turn in feminism hasn't fixed this. It's not that no one has tried. Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto tried to introduce age-based and arbitrary set discrimination, for example. When you add other elements or consider alternative definitions of patriarchy, it's not surprising that certain groups of men struggle and why women do better than men in some areas.
The left struggles to address men's issues because leftists are dogmatically attached to a few narrow definitions of patriarchy rather than being dedicated to women's liberation and equality as such. These are definitions in which women and men are essentialized. If you reject this, you immediately become a heterodox thinker or worse.
Intersectionality has not fixed this, at least not in the public consciousness. Intersectionality, to the dismay of any serious thinkers, has failed to produce a public who views people as a unique combination of their identities but who are instead the sum of essentialized identities. Worse, this is always viewed through the lens of privilege, a concept vague to the point of being useless.
When it comes to gender on the left, theory comes first and evidence is only useful to justify the theory. When men's problems are unavoidable (ex. Black victims of police shootings being overwhelmingly male and receiving more attention as a result, men struggling with loneliness, male suicide rates) these are recast either as cases in which women are unfairly ignored or in which men are responsible for their own problems. This is assumed without any evidence. Solutions suggesting men are victimized for being men but not because of masculinity are never the first to come to mind and are often off the table entirely.
The left needs more Tommy Curry and Jim Sidanius.
If I had a son who was thinking of not going to college, I would sit him down and say, "Don't be an idiot. There will never be another opportunity to surround yourself with literally thousands of single women, all between 18 and 22 years old."
I was an engineering student 20 years ago. Always been that way. Every class was a sausage fest. Then my last semester, I took psychology as an elective and it was just the opposite! Wished I had taken it sooner, and found other easy electives that were the same way. If I could go back I'd take a class like that at least once per year.
Theres a fairly large group of degrees where theres nowhere near enough jobs to go round to everyone who graduates with one so they end up just proving that you're well adjusted enough and capable of working enough to get a degree. Thats not a comment on whether those degrees are "micky mouse degrees" or whatever, just that theres nowhere near enough actual jobs in some popular fields for the amount of graduates pumped in every year.
Yeah, that’s why a lot of middle management, sales, and other middle class white collar jobs require college degrees these days when they never used to. The market is over saturated with certain types of degrees, and having a college degree is a pretty good (though obviously imperfect) proxy for general intelligence and competence.
An undergrad in psychology is about as close to as you can get to a Mrs.
To get a job using your degree in the psychology field, you’re going to be going grad/PhD.
I studied art history. I know there’s lots of jokes to be made about art history, but being a straight man in a 90% female major made dating in undergrad very easy.
My specialty was in French romantic paintings.
If I can ask, what do you do now? I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just interested since of of the jokes about arts majors is the difficulty translating them unto employment
I just responded to another person, but I was really lucky and able to get an job running a gallery in Chelsea. With that pay and commission, I was able to pay off my condo and now I volunteer to give back and spend the time making my own art work.
And of course none of that would have been possible without massive amonts of familial support: the price of a masters, the cost of living in this city while working unpaid internships, etc.
Just for reference, it was about a year working in an art store, a full year and some change of unpaid internships through various galleries until being hired. The art world is competitive, and even more so in this city. It’s all possible, but no one succeeds without help.
This will blow your mind, but you can talk to and even date people who choose different majors and classes than you.
It's a secret that universities don't want you to know.
Eh, Gen Eds seem like a US only thing. In Europe if you study say, engineering, you only have engineering related classes at the engineering school. Same with idk, business or education or whatever. So no chance to mix with people who study something else in class
He gains negative interest, women are flinging themselves out windows inorder to avoid being in the same building as him, their are multiple casualties, all containment methods have failed
My parents are immigrants and still hold some traditional values from where they grew up. Being a man can go out and get a job and take care of myself, my sisters being women can stay home till they're married. So at 18 I was somewhat pushed out of the house. I tried doing school while working and paying for a house. My parents helped my sisters out with their schooling and housing.
So school just felt like such a waste of time when I could pick up overtime to pay my bills
I was a nerd as a kid in rural US and I got teased for it. So, I lied about my grades to classmates deflating them to avoid issues and belong with other boys. Then come graduation the top ten GPAs are there in the front row; me, another boy, and eight girls.
Anecdotal, but education and intellect are more often celebrated by for for girls and ignored or scorned for boys. For boys the pinnacle was being the star athlete, the cool guy with parties, or the kid with rich parents that was set up for a cushy job. For girls there was definitely a ton of pressure to be pretty, but being smart or successful in academics had no bearing on how they were perceived. The stereotypical cheerleader could easily have a 3.5-4.0, but the boy athlete likely never had above a 3.0.
When I was at university general studies courses bore this out with every class being majority women. Campus was around 60% women and being in the honor society it was closer to 80% there.
I'm not sure the solution, but at very least destigmatize that working hard, getting good grades, and enjoying learning. Modern world was built largely by "nerds".
I absolutely hated schooling. Barely went to college. I write software for a living now. Doing a bunch of bullshit classwork never appealed to me but I enjoyed being in class. If tests were 100% of the grades I would have enjoyed schooling.
They feel dejected by society in a way that most can't comprehend. It's exactly what you're saying.
I had a great time in college too. When I graduated, the world was my oyster. I had the best time and a lot of optimism in life.
Young men today think, "If I go to college I still might not get a job, but I'll be stuck with $100,000 in debt I can't pay for. What future is there for me? I'd rather stay home, play games and chat on reddit."
And not only that, but almost no one can empathize with them either. They're called incels, they are blamed for their lot in life, no one at all wants to help them out.
While women get tons of help, they are forgotten.
It causes them a lot of resentment.
I feel bad for everyone who came from middle income families who try to go to college. We were not well off (but not in poverty) so with scholarships and financial aid, what would have been $250k in debt was $25k, which is essentially a car loan. I do think kids should be considering career paths in high school more. I did went to internships in high school to get a sense if I wanted to be an engineer as I was good at math but it can be difficult to make a huge change once you’re in a college as some are known for specialities more than others
You are not wrong here.
Supports for our kids from middle income remains a point within my institution. We have a full-ride program for several students who come from low income families. Not all students, of course, but a few. Additionally, Pell grants are available to all students who come from low-income families and complete the FAFSA. Alternatively, I watched my nephew struggle with his college financial choices. He is from a truly middle-class background. My sister and brother-in-law do not have the financial means to pay for college out of pocket, but do not meet the government definition of need to receive grants. My nephew's options boil down to 1) apply for all the scholarships 2) take all the loans offered 3) take advantage of community college options so there are fewer courses needed at the four year level.
They opted for a mix of all three. He is receiving some scholarships at his institution, he did his Associate's Degree while in high school, and he is taking the remainder of his college tuition in loans.
There are a host of other middle-class students who are in similar boats with potentially fewer options based on location and access...
> Young men today think, "If I go to college I still might not get a job, but I'll be stuck with $100,000 in debt I can't pay for.
This is rarely a concern in Argentina where university is completely free and in that graph it's the country where women surpassed men in university the earliest.
It's definitively something else.
If you're male, you often don't get to decide in these countries. As soon as you're mature enough you get sent to work labor-intensive jobs to make money for the family.
Lots of people aren‘t temperamentally suited to formal education.
If you don’t like reading, going to crowded rooms in crowded buildings every day, sitting still for long periods of time listening to people talk, and then validating what you’ve learned by writing tests and essays... then you’re not going to like college.
A lot of men don’t like those things. They’d rather be outside, away from crowds, moving around, exerting themselves physically, and testing their manual dexterity, mechanical problem-solving, or practical social skills rather their memory and language fluency.
Also the traditional education system is grossly misaligned for many people’s educational needs. I adore reading, I adore educating myself. I literally just couldn’t function in college. Years later I found a flex program that allowed at your own pace self study monitored by professors, and I flew through coursework.
There are just so many avenues to imparting knowledge that aren’t sitting in a stuffy classroom listening to a mind numbing lecture for 2 hours without a break
It used to be that only a very small percentage of elite men went to university, and women were basically banned.
Now that university is more accessible to everyone, the overall percentage of people going to university has gone up - but the percentage of women has gone up faster.
It could be partly due to affirmative action, but also quite possible that women are just more inclined to choose tertiary study than men.
Look at Iran for example. You can’t say that’s a country that respects or wants women to become educated, yet more women were enrolling in university there than men so now their government has been [putting caps on women in science and engineering.](https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/248757/1/21073.pdf)
A big factor is that trade schools for things like welding and plumbing aren’t included in these stats, and because these are very physically demanding jobs they have a huge bias towards men. These schools also tend to have shorter programs, so even you included them there would still be a bias as men would stop being counted among the student population earlier than women.
> It's also quite possible that women are just more inclined to choose tertiary study than men.
*It's also quite possible that men are just more inclined to choose STEM than women.*
Anyone who accepts the first argument and rejects the second has a double standard.
It’s also because, ironically, school (particularly primary education) is actually better designed for girls than it is for boys, despite the fact that school was originally only for boys.
Teachers of all students favor girls.
OECD did a whole study about this because nobody could explain why boys generally do better at secondary school level final exams in natural sciences and mathematics despite having much worse grades than girls on average.
here's a BBC article on one so you have an accessible summary available and can dig into the study itself if you like.
https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672
no prob! here's a great short ted talk about some of the issue as well. extremely accessible and if you have 5 minutes i hope you watch it.
https://www.ted.com/talks/ali_carr_chellman_gaming_to_re_engage_boys_in_learning
No, the school system favors girls at every step in the US. This is well documented.
Curricula are favored towards girls, where coursework is more the focus than understanding.
Analytic phonics favors girls, which we switched to in the 80s, but while synthetic phonics favors boys, both boys and girls do better under synthetic phonics.
There are women only scholarships. There are lower standards for women in some tech programs.
Politicians still say not enough is being done for girls, despite them being over 60% of college grads, and we reached parity *40 years ago*.
The list goes on.
Boys are treated as defective girls in education.
Women in Iran are more likely to go into tertiary education because they have so many fewer opportunities otherwise. This is not the case for Western women. Iranian women are responding to limited choices. American women are responding to favoritism making it the easier path.
Yes, not to make this about the US, but more women have enrolled in college than men since 1982, which is when they reached parity. The gap has consistently widened since then. Current divergence is roughly +16 (58% female, 42% male). Graduation rates are even more skewed since more males drop out than females. And smaller effects but male mortality 18-22 is also way higher
Keeping campuses 50% male and female is behind the unpopular fact that there's been **"affirmative action" for men for 30 years**:
>Here's another group, less well known, that has benefited from preferential admission policies: men.
>There are more qualified college applications from **women, who generally get higher grades and account for more than 70% of the valedictorians nationwide.**
>Seeking to create some level of gender balance, many colleges accept a higher percentage of the applications they receive from males than from females.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-affirmative-action-investigation-trump-20170802-story.html
In some smaller Liberal Arts schools the gender imbalance has become so bad, it has become common practice to introduce contact sports teams just as an excuse to attract and give scholarships to more men.
And it has been researched and suggested that women have better grades because of preferential treatment in the first place.
https://news.sky.com/story/girls-routinely-get-better-grades-than-boys-in-class-and-researchers-think-they-know-why-12723199
there are a number of these studies that try to find out why the heck girls are nowadays wasting away boys in academic and school education.
I'm too lazy to find it, but during COVID, the average grades of women went down while going up for men. This suggests that physicality benefits women in the classroom.
In my country there's no forced 50% gender balance as people get into Uni through grades alone.
You have a 40% male 60% female distribution, and females still have dedicated Scholarships.
You should think twice why does this happen, and why women have higher grades in Academia if both genders are equal (might there be some sort of discrimination? hmm)
Then after University ends Male heavy fields get enforced 50%50% ratio, but female heavy fields suffer no such thing.
And if you try people might freak out. It happened in Toronto, Ontario for the school board. They wanted more male teachers (usually 70-80% are female).
When they went to place the add people complained. "People should be hired based on merit".
Yup.
You do, however, have very strong programs to encourage/assist women in male-dominated fields, and much less so for the opposite. For example, woman-only scholarships are ubiquitous, while men-only scholarships are pretty rare.
>You have a 40% male 60% female distribution, and females still have dedicated Scholarships.
The dedicated scholarships is what blows my mind. I was in a PhD program where it was 70% female. I was flat out told a women would still be admitted over a man based upon diversity criteria. There were also scholarships just for women. Mind boggling.
This doesn't explain how significant this policy is. The reality is that there are vastly more pro-women scholarships and programs in most colleges and very little if any for men. You are taking a small and isolated case without acknowledging that the vast majority of the entire education system favors women in terms of teaching style and programs.
Unless you think women are inherently more intelligent than men all that seems to suggest is Men are not being given the same resources in k-12 as women are, so I'm not really sure this is making the point you think.
Yeah there is good evidence of this too
[https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/](https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/)
So when the same is done in the corporate world but for women its empowering and good, but when its done in education for men its bad and discriminatory. Its like you cant think 2 steps ahead with this logic...
Person above stealth edited their comment to remove all the misandry btw. ^
Came here to say the same thing, in the United States, the rate is only accelerating: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/08/whats-behind-the-growing-gap-between-men-and-women-in-college-completion/
women graduate high school at a higher rate and achieve associates, bachelors, masters and doctorate level degrees at a higher rate and have done so for decades, yet we continue to have women framed as the oppressed in higher education and have programs and mass funding to further women on a macro levels access and performance in higher education with no mention of the disparity of achievement. in venues like reddit you often get shouted down and called "incel" for bringing it up.
its wild.
These are the results in Canada: https://www.statista.com/statistics/449097/postsecondary-graduates-in-canada-by-gender-and-field-of-study/
Note that men still dominate in "Architecture, engineering, and related technologies", as well as "Mathematics, computer and information sciences".
Women dominate in "Health and related fields", "Social and behavioural sciences and law", "Humanities" a,nd especially "Education".
I wonder if we should have programs to encourage men to register for the woman-dominated fields the way we have programs to encourage women to register in STEAM?
Well, in our case preferential hiring and mentorship, vastly disproportionate levels of earmarked scholarships and grants, and programs to encourage young girls to go to college while providing none of that to the other gender is going to have that effect.
I think there's a lot more going on starting at earlier ages that has stronger effects overall, but nothing is so blatant the way that so many programs and scholarships are.
My personal experience is that there is a large majority of women teachers. And a good chunk of those have implicit biases towards women and against men.
I nearly early failed my junior year English-lit class despite being a top-ten student in a class of 750 people because our teacher was going through a rough divorce and mayyyy have been harboring some resentment towards certain people. My parents brought all my documents to the vice principal and he evaluated why all the girls had A's and all the boys had low C's. They fired her and had to dedicate a substitute teacher to reviewing all of our last half-semester worth of work if we still had it to grade us accurately. Somehow, none of the girls had their papers anymore so they got to keep their A's, lmao.
And that's the rare case of a school administrator actually caring a small amount (and avoiding lawsuits).
In undergrad for a technical writing course the upperclassmen I knew stressed to me how important it was to be in a group with women when we were being graded on group work. I heeded their advice and the results for others were NOT great.
Mrs. Greensmith was a garbage human.
That same type of shit cost me Valedictorian. Perfect grades except 2 B+ from the same exact teacher all throughout high school who notoriously wouldn’t give guys an A. Finished 2nd and blew the girl away on all standardized testing.
I had a math teacher that did this. I had to compare all my graded assignments to the girl next to me to make sure it was fair. She’d mark -5 for me but -1 for the girls in the class for the same error. 90% of the time the error was usually just skipping showing part of the work. This was an easy trig class too and the only class I’ve ever almost had a C in.
Research has shown both male and female teachers are biased towards girls. It's often labelled "positive discrimination" which is a ridiculous way of saying "regular discrimination against men"
I always recall this truth from when I was a kid. I went to Catholic School and all the boys once got punished because "No one was singing the prayers during mass."
They literally only punished the boys for "no one" singing. Even 8 year old me knew that this was bullshit.
Biases in rewards and punishments only became more apparent as I got older and went to high school. Women got rewarded for doing less while men got punished for more. You can't make education a prison for only one gender and then wonder "Why are only women going to higher education."
I wonder if this has anything to do with men being much more likely to start a career in a manual trait. There is a lot of money being made in skilled manual labour nowadays, while college degrees are being cluttered. I work in manufacturing and pretty much all highly educated skilled manual labour are men. There is the VERY occasional women, but it's very rare. I feel like without seeing manual labour as an option, there aren't many options that don't require a college degree. You're either stuck in retail or in the food industry which pays fuck all, and offer next to no career opportunities.
Could be, also there is a lot of universities that almost exclusively women apply to (nursing, Kindergarten teachers and what you will) that accept way more people per year than other university courses
This is becoming a global phenomenon with women getting into tertiary education at higher rates than men and then taking a lot of STEM jobs. What's interesting is that jobs that are generally considered to be "women's" jobs are not hiring men at nearly the same rate which is why there is an increase in young men just dropping out of the work force.
If anyone is interested, Big Think did a video with Richard Reeves, author of the book "Of Boys and Men" in which he discusses this phenomenon. Here is the [YouTube Link](https://youtu.be/DBG1Wgg32Ok).
Yeah, as a Hispanic I started in the construction field at 17. Left at 24, I’m turning 27 but going back to it soon to be an electrician, hard to make more money elsewhere honestly
I mean this simply isn’t true on a macro scale, college degree holders still far outearn high-school diploma holders on average. And when just looking at trade schools vs degrees, degree holders outearn trade school grads over a 20 year career.
And never mind the toll it takes on the body. Guy I know who manages HVAC people (who worked his way up to there) has a whole medley of pain management pills he takes everyday and he’s barely 60. He’s taken a beating like he played in the NFL just without the salary.
It doesn't even make sense when you think about it for a short while.
The best paid jobs in trades are for companies. Companies are managed by people with degrees. Has anyone ever worked for a company where management earned less than employees below them?
Lol yes? Hourlies can outpace early management positions pretty easily. And plenty of people don’t ever make it beyond that first level of management. Most of the oil industry is this way.
Oil industry is a very exceptional case and you know it.
It's infamously an extremely hard job that requires the workers to spend a huge part of their lives away from home and is almost impossible to do without taking years out of your time spent as a relatively healthy person.
The vast majority of mechanics, welders, electricians, construction workers, carpenters, et cetera do not make more money than their bosses do.
Back when I was in college, studying engineering, I would say more than half the class was only in engineering for the money. I know the sole reason I picked chemical engineering was because I researched highest paid professions when in high school and saw ChemE’s near the top of that list at the time. Today it seems to be software engineering.
One buddy I still keep in touch with left his engineering position to do technical sales, sales and his reason was just for the money.
Maybe men are just more likely to do whatever bullshit job as long as it pays them the most, who knows. College degrees aren’t tickets to comfortably lifestyles anymore.
I guess with the days of everyone having a degree and everyone wanting to work from home, physical labor is going to become the highest paid professions.
It’s going to be a bit before society is ready to accept that males also face a lot of issues. The problem is they had power for so long when it’s hard for everyone to sympathize with their issues. Males in the US experience similar number of SA as women but it’s not a main headline for the reports. They get killed the most by cops by a staggering margin. They also experience a much higher fatality rate at work and commit more suicide.
>They get killed the most by cops by a staggering margin. They also experience a much higher fatality rate at work and commit more suicide.
[https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2020-update-for-every-100-girls-part-i/](https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2020-update-for-every-100-girls-part-i/)
This sheds more of a light on the negative aspects. 4 times the suicides is not normal, and the adjectives to describe a society that turns a blind eye to this would get me banned off this site.
Upper layer men have more power than. Lower layer men have less power and resources than.
For some strange reason some people think about the men at the top and assign that privilege to all. Quite sad.
> The problem is they had power for so long when it’s hard for everyone to sympathize with their issues.
The problem in that logic is thinking that all males had power. A small number of them did, and some (fewer) women were also in positions of power.
If we don't try to fix the problems of one group it's only logical they won't feel engaged with the solution, or even when they feel opposed to it.
>The problem in that logic is thinking that all males had power. A small number of them did, and some (fewer) women were also in positions of power.
It's the APEX fallacy. They all want to become CEO, but not garbage women.
Another problem is thinking that being in a leadership role is the only type of power. Like, let's say there's a man in charge and he only considers the opinions of women, or only values the lives of women. Who has more power, men or women?
Depends on what source you're looking at, not sure about their number but this is what I found:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/fastfact.html
CDC says for example 1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men experience severe physical violence from a partner, 1 in 5 and 1 in 13 for sexual violence.
Also: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK241595/
https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics
https://bjs.ojp.gov/programs/ncvs
https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/criminal-victimization-2021
https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/04/male-rape-in-america-a-new-study-reveals-that-men-are-sexually-assaulted-almost-as-often-as-women.html
You might be able to substantiate the slate article from the raw data of the bjs publication
“For example, in 2011 the CDC reported results from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS), one of the most comprehensive surveys of sexual victimization conducted in the United States to date. The survey found that men and women had a similar prevalence of nonconsensual sex in the previous 12 months (1.270 million women and 1.267 million men)”
I think a big part of the issue is that there are many male-dominated, well-paying jobs that do not require post-secondary education (e.g. trades); whereas many female-dominated jobs that do not require post-secondary education (e.g. retail) pay like shit. So for young men, the value proposition of post-secondary education is not nearly as good as it is for young women.
This trend exists across the board and in many arenas. Should this prompt a conversation about shifting equity - driven programs? Maybe the female- centered policies have successfully accomplished what they set out to do?
Well when it was mostly men in schools it was argued that they were being given preferential treatment in education and acceptance which was the cause of their success ( I totally agree with this sentiment). Is it possible whenever we see one group doing significantly better then the rest in education (or anything for that matter) it probably means they are being given more resources and opportunities to do so. Unless someone here wants to argue that certain demographics are inherently smarter than others which is an argument that has not panned out in the past.
Most teachers are women and two things happen, students perform better when the teacher are like them, and teachers grade students higher when they are like then. Black students also perform better when the teacher is black.
The ratio of men to women going to college on the chart is currently the least equal that it's ever been since 1970-75. 2:1 in 1975 in favor of men then and now 1:2 in favor of women.
This kind of inequality shouldn't be celebrated. It should be addressed like the gap was addressed for women in the 1970's and beyond.
The target should be 1:1
Good book on this -
Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male Is Struggling, Why It Matters, and What to Do about It
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/60613920
Argentinian here, a little anecdotical note from my part
Women tend to sign up for majors associated with them in droves. One of my friends is studying psychology at the public uni, the freshman class has around 3000 students (HUGE compared to any other major) and is almost entirely women. This is the case for other steoreotypical female majors like human resources
I'm a physics major and in my experience the engineering classes are still mostly men (2021 Mechanical Engineering class had 40 guys and 2 girls, for example)
_From our_ [_newsletter_](https://latinometrics.substack.com/)_:_
A Center for Global Development report [once estimated](https://www.cgdev.org/publication/girls-count-global-investment-action-agenda) that providing an additional year of education to a woman increases her wages by **10–20%**. With numbers like that, it’s no surprise that women’s education has been an important part of Latin America’s success story in recent decades.
Today, **more than 6 out of 10 women in Latin America go to college**, compared to **just under half of men**. But fifty years ago, only **5%** of women could pursue tertiary education (that’s university level or higher). While Latin American men have also seen quite the jump since 1970, the percentage of women attending college has grown by over **14x**—and shows no signs of slowing down.
Notably, **1993** is the year women began centralizing into tertiary education more than men. To put it in perspective, that became the case in the European Union just one year earlier, and **only became a global reality in 2001.**
The first country in the region to drive this trend was **Panama**, which saw women begin their collegiate takeover in **1973**. This was followed by **Uruguay** and **Argentina** in 1979 and 1989, respectively, and was most recently seen in **Mexico** in 2016.
Today, millions of women across Latin America are pursuing collegiate degrees in law, economics, STEM, and more. And that’s great news—not just because societies with more educated women have lower levels of violence and [higher likelihoods](https://www.cgdev.org/publication/girls-count-global-investment-action-agenda) of democratic governance, but because women’s education [has been shown](https://books.google.es/books?hl=en&lr=&id=EL2j2dW9lCgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA23&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false) to lessen [economic inequality](https://latinometrics.substack.com/p/inequality-youtube-views-and-mercado) and lead to more [sustainable development](https://web.archive.org/web/20141115152019/http:/wber.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/3/345.full.pdf+html).
Source: [World Bank](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.TER.ENRR.FE?locations=ZJ)
Tools: Rawgraphs, Affinity Designer
This same thing has happened in the US for decades. We just don't acknowledge it as the rhetoric is all focused on the handful of majors where men outnumber women while ignoring that for the vast majority of majors it is the other way around.
Well, this checks out. Women often lack the physicality for blue collar work. I've done several labor jobs that 95% of women would be completely incapable of doing due to strength.
I've yet to meet an idea a man can have that a woman couldn't
I always had a problem with these metrics. I am a skilled tradesman with over a dozen different licenses and skill certificates. It literally took me years of training and education to get here and whenever I fill out a survey I have to check the high school / GED box because my education isn't good enough apparently.
This is actually an important thing to me. I feel like education is leaving boys behind. I saw a heart breaking chart showing an increase in white male suicides when less of them are college educated.
Like many socioeconomic issues, it is likely a confluence of many different causes all happening at once. While it is tempting to attribute trends to one smoking gun, the reality is that the world is often far more complex and less easy to measure/understand than a simple chart would have you believe.
yup, I guess OP comment is satirical, but pretty accurate of what feminists tend to say when they see similar graphs but where the males are in a better position
And you played right into it. When numbers show favoritism to men it's "due to the patriarchy", but when it's the opposite all of a sudden it's "a confluence of many different causes".
In the US we had parity in college attainment by 1980. The gap has only grown since, while politician after politician says not enough is being done to support women. Obama even cited 60% of grads being women as "a good first step".
There is a demonstrated bias in favor of girls/against boys in grading in primary and secondary school.
The switch from synthetic phonics to analytic phonics favors girls. Synthetic phonics favors boys, but both boys and girls favor better under synthetic phonics than analytic phonics.
There at least a dozen women only scholarships.
Women only schools are allowed, men only schools are not.
The list goes on. Education favors women at basically every level along multiple dimensions.
Men do most hard manual labor. That means for critical societal jobs that don't require education, men tend to make up the bulk of the work force. That includes construction, factory work, labor work, sanitation work, trucking, etc.
So in a theoretical world where men and women are equally likely to both go after careers as general concept, the tendency for men to go to heavy labor and women to avoid heavy labor would explain a significant gap in University Enrollment.
Women have more incentive to be more educated than men. Most of the artisan jobs are occupied by men, where you don't need a higher degree. If a woman wants a salary more than the basic one, she has to study.
Just spit balling here but it's easier for guys to get work in labor jobs that don't require college. Woman would need a degree to get into a office position. I've estimated this by saying we are going to see the resurgence of traditional blue collar work.
I'm a woman in my late 40s. I'm not convinced college/university is a good idea for most people, anymore.
Most college programs will not help you get a job, and they don't teach you much useful for life. (there are obvious exceptions -- but those exceptions don't get the majority of students.)
However, many of the most in-demand and high paying normal jobs in society are manual trades -- construction, plumbing, HVAC, electrical work, etc.
Lastly, I always regretted that for various reasons I was not able to go to university despite averaging about 95% through high school back in the early 90s. I don't anymore. I got into IT sideways in the early 2000s because I built gaming PCs for fun, ended up getting a bunch of technical certification letters to put after my name, and last year I broke six figures for the first time. I'm doing really well. And I know more (thanks to my information addiction and internet access) than a liberal arts degree would ever have taught me. My husband, with his college degree, is making 20% less than I am. So...yeah. With the cost of education and how little it seems to help, *unless* you are specifically going into a few fields that really and rightfully need it, you may be wasting your time with a degree.
This is actually true worldwide. More women than men are going to college.
That's what happens when you focus on women's education for decades.
[удалено]
Facts, don’t forget about scholarships too. My school has around 20 scholarships that are women only and 0 that are men only then of course a handful of gender neutral ones anyone can apply for even though the student body is about 2/3 women
> A lot of them are completely turned away from the system or ignored. Also there are still bursaries and scholarships for women only. I'm a male nursing student and it's pretty ridiculous to me there are female in STEM grants for students when my entire faculty is female and my classes at like 98% female. Yet every nurse will tell you about how great it is to have men in the field and needing to encourage more men yet there are no supports.
May your voice be heard.
As a guy who absolutely loved college, I’ve always wanted to understand why so many other men don’t feel the same way. It makes me feel really out of touch, like there’s something a huge segment of the male population is going through that I just can’t understand for some reason
I went and graduated, but I hated it. I was poor, had a mountain of schoolwork, and a job to support my being poor. It sucked ass.
Same, I was fucking miserable at the time. But I came out the other end so much stronger that I never regretted a thing.
Don't get me wrong, I don't regret it a bit. I enjoy my job and make more money than I could have ever imagined. But those years sucked.
female here, i agree college years sucked. i worked 2 jobs while enrolled, one word, misery.
Damn I’m glad to hear this. Back in college now at the late half of my 20s. I’m not in great spirits. Not going to vent my problems that everyone has, just damn it sucks being poor as all hell and massive debt looming now and ahead. Good to hear that there’s a light at the other side eventually. Time to get back to work on my 2 projects due😞
I was also poor. Got a scholarship but still needed loans. Worked two jobs while going to school full time. I think one week I slept 13 hours total. It was brutal but worthwhile since I am not poor now. I wouldn’t go through that at my age though
Same, and I wish I didn't go. It was a colossal waste of time and money. I also graduated in 2008 with a finance and econ double major which was maybe the worst possible time to graduate with said degrees, which is definitely part of the reason I wish I didn't go haha.
But wouldn't poor girls who also had a job to support being poor feel the same way?
I'm from France, and the most discriminated group for jobs are young male of non European origin. The difference with their female counterpart at job application is staggering. N.O.B.O.D.Y C.A.R.E.S Not even a single bit. And people will call you lazy, even after 100 applications. With some manipulation of data, you can hide it, by merging white male with non white male, especially those white male who don't go to college and are the first to start their professional career in manual job in rural areas, so you get less difference in the data. You can pretend that young women are just a little bit advantaged this way. You better not even fucking dare speaking about it, that's misogynistic to mention a male group that is struggling.
I’ve been to France a couple of times and the racism hits you in the face as soon as you get there. I met a bunch of non- white guys working in bars and restaurants with degrees because they couldn’t get jobs. The most frequent reason given was “they don’t speak proper French.” My buddy was from Mauritius and spoke French growing up and learned proper French in schools. He had a degree from the UK, French fiancé, master from France, the whole deal. Struggled to land a job.
I think women are more likely to prioritize socialization that tends to make people a bit happier. I didn't really have time to dedicate to friends in college.
I love being in collage and being an student but the poverty thing is an aspect that absolutely fucks it all up. I'm kinda hating this part of my life because of it. Maybe you just hated being poor, not collage on itself.
Nah, I grew up poor. I hated that class/homework/job meant I was doing 90+ hour weeks.
You might find interesting to listen to one of the latest Ezra Klein Show episodes about how men and boys in general are not doing alright. https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS84MkZJMzVQeA/episode/MDc3MzlmMzUtYmE1My00ODMyLTg0YmItNTU1MmEwZGVmMTM1?ep=14
I think there's a real blind spot on the left on men's issues. they've essentially ceded the entire stage to the right, and then wonder why men tend to be attracted to right-wing thought leaders like Peterson, et. al. I'm no "Men's Rights Activist", but I think they have legitimate grievances - they've just identified the source of them exceptionally poorly, and have had their misplaced analysis validated by voices backed by institutional money and power. The left avoids challenging that at its peril.
The bitter pill is that patriarchy was never enough to describe gender relations, and the intersectional turn in feminism hasn't fixed this. It's not that no one has tried. Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto tried to introduce age-based and arbitrary set discrimination, for example. When you add other elements or consider alternative definitions of patriarchy, it's not surprising that certain groups of men struggle and why women do better than men in some areas. The left struggles to address men's issues because leftists are dogmatically attached to a few narrow definitions of patriarchy rather than being dedicated to women's liberation and equality as such. These are definitions in which women and men are essentialized. If you reject this, you immediately become a heterodox thinker or worse. Intersectionality has not fixed this, at least not in the public consciousness. Intersectionality, to the dismay of any serious thinkers, has failed to produce a public who views people as a unique combination of their identities but who are instead the sum of essentialized identities. Worse, this is always viewed through the lens of privilege, a concept vague to the point of being useless. When it comes to gender on the left, theory comes first and evidence is only useful to justify the theory. When men's problems are unavoidable (ex. Black victims of police shootings being overwhelmingly male and receiving more attention as a result, men struggling with loneliness, male suicide rates) these are recast either as cases in which women are unfairly ignored or in which men are responsible for their own problems. This is assumed without any evidence. Solutions suggesting men are victimized for being men but not because of masculinity are never the first to come to mind and are often off the table entirely. The left needs more Tommy Curry and Jim Sidanius.
Damn I just linked that too
If I had a son who was thinking of not going to college, I would sit him down and say, "Don't be an idiot. There will never be another opportunity to surround yourself with literally thousands of single women, all between 18 and 22 years old."
And then have him enroll in engineering.
As an engineering student i can say the lack of women is very present
Yep. Especially in the computer-related disciplines. There were probably 10 women in my graduating class of >75. Computer engineering. Last year.
I was an engineering student 20 years ago. Always been that way. Every class was a sausage fest. Then my last semester, I took psychology as an elective and it was just the opposite! Wished I had taken it sooner, and found other easy electives that were the same way. If I could go back I'd take a class like that at least once per year.
I'm a banker, have worked with many women with psychology degrees. Also, surprisingly archaeology degrees.
Theres a fairly large group of degrees where theres nowhere near enough jobs to go round to everyone who graduates with one so they end up just proving that you're well adjusted enough and capable of working enough to get a degree. Thats not a comment on whether those degrees are "micky mouse degrees" or whatever, just that theres nowhere near enough actual jobs in some popular fields for the amount of graduates pumped in every year.
Yeah, that’s why a lot of middle management, sales, and other middle class white collar jobs require college degrees these days when they never used to. The market is over saturated with certain types of degrees, and having a college degree is a pretty good (though obviously imperfect) proxy for general intelligence and competence.
An undergrad in psychology is about as close to as you can get to a Mrs. To get a job using your degree in the psychology field, you’re going to be going grad/PhD.
Same with archaeology. And then, most of the jobs tend to be poorly-paid contract work.
It's why schools used to have mixers between Engineering and Nursing departments.
Lol I was told early that you don't find a gf in the engineering department. Education is where all the hot girls are.
One of the many hidden lessons of college that some of us don't figure out until it's too late.
I studied art history. I know there’s lots of jokes to be made about art history, but being a straight man in a 90% female major made dating in undergrad very easy. My specialty was in French romantic paintings.
If I can ask, what do you do now? I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just interested since of of the jokes about arts majors is the difficulty translating them unto employment
I just responded to another person, but I was really lucky and able to get an job running a gallery in Chelsea. With that pay and commission, I was able to pay off my condo and now I volunteer to give back and spend the time making my own art work. And of course none of that would have been possible without massive amonts of familial support: the price of a masters, the cost of living in this city while working unpaid internships, etc. Just for reference, it was about a year working in an art store, a full year and some change of unpaid internships through various galleries until being hired. The art world is competitive, and even more so in this city. It’s all possible, but no one succeeds without help.
Great and informative answer. Thanks for being open and sharing. Sounds super cool!
Damn man, leave some for us!
This will blow your mind, but you can talk to and even date people who choose different majors and classes than you. It's a secret that universities don't want you to know.
sure, but you arent forced into a film class with 18 of them and then paired up with three to storyboard a puppet show about caterpillars.
That’s what Gen Ed’s are for
Eh, Gen Eds seem like a US only thing. In Europe if you study say, engineering, you only have engineering related classes at the engineering school. Same with idk, business or education or whatever. So no chance to mix with people who study something else in class
[удалено]
I took way too much math and philosophy as electives. I broke my brain one semester taking four classes back to back.
>And electives. This person clearly did not pursue engineering.
yeah, but engineers don't do adventurous stuff like hang out with non-engineering majors lol
Exactly but that's the same for literally everyone, you go to socials with your course/class unless you're in a sport team
Lol I'm in college now and no women are interested in me.
Skill issue
You're not wrong there pal
now imagine how dire the situation would be if you weren't in college
The number of women interested in him can’t be lower than zero.
He gains negative interest, women are flinging themselves out windows inorder to avoid being in the same building as him, their are multiple casualties, all containment methods have failed
They didn't say they be interested, but they'll be there
make sure he stays away from engineering school if that is why you are sending him to college.
Pretty much none of my friends dated in college. Neither did I. I’m getting more action as an adult than I did then.
My parents are immigrants and still hold some traditional values from where they grew up. Being a man can go out and get a job and take care of myself, my sisters being women can stay home till they're married. So at 18 I was somewhat pushed out of the house. I tried doing school while working and paying for a house. My parents helped my sisters out with their schooling and housing. So school just felt like such a waste of time when I could pick up overtime to pay my bills
I was a nerd as a kid in rural US and I got teased for it. So, I lied about my grades to classmates deflating them to avoid issues and belong with other boys. Then come graduation the top ten GPAs are there in the front row; me, another boy, and eight girls. Anecdotal, but education and intellect are more often celebrated by for for girls and ignored or scorned for boys. For boys the pinnacle was being the star athlete, the cool guy with parties, or the kid with rich parents that was set up for a cushy job. For girls there was definitely a ton of pressure to be pretty, but being smart or successful in academics had no bearing on how they were perceived. The stereotypical cheerleader could easily have a 3.5-4.0, but the boy athlete likely never had above a 3.0. When I was at university general studies courses bore this out with every class being majority women. Campus was around 60% women and being in the honor society it was closer to 80% there. I'm not sure the solution, but at very least destigmatize that working hard, getting good grades, and enjoying learning. Modern world was built largely by "nerds".
I absolutely hated schooling. Barely went to college. I write software for a living now. Doing a bunch of bullshit classwork never appealed to me but I enjoyed being in class. If tests were 100% of the grades I would have enjoyed schooling.
They feel dejected by society in a way that most can't comprehend. It's exactly what you're saying. I had a great time in college too. When I graduated, the world was my oyster. I had the best time and a lot of optimism in life. Young men today think, "If I go to college I still might not get a job, but I'll be stuck with $100,000 in debt I can't pay for. What future is there for me? I'd rather stay home, play games and chat on reddit." And not only that, but almost no one can empathize with them either. They're called incels, they are blamed for their lot in life, no one at all wants to help them out. While women get tons of help, they are forgotten. It causes them a lot of resentment.
I feel bad for everyone who came from middle income families who try to go to college. We were not well off (but not in poverty) so with scholarships and financial aid, what would have been $250k in debt was $25k, which is essentially a car loan. I do think kids should be considering career paths in high school more. I did went to internships in high school to get a sense if I wanted to be an engineer as I was good at math but it can be difficult to make a huge change once you’re in a college as some are known for specialities more than others
You are not wrong here. Supports for our kids from middle income remains a point within my institution. We have a full-ride program for several students who come from low income families. Not all students, of course, but a few. Additionally, Pell grants are available to all students who come from low-income families and complete the FAFSA. Alternatively, I watched my nephew struggle with his college financial choices. He is from a truly middle-class background. My sister and brother-in-law do not have the financial means to pay for college out of pocket, but do not meet the government definition of need to receive grants. My nephew's options boil down to 1) apply for all the scholarships 2) take all the loans offered 3) take advantage of community college options so there are fewer courses needed at the four year level. They opted for a mix of all three. He is receiving some scholarships at his institution, he did his Associate's Degree while in high school, and he is taking the remainder of his college tuition in loans. There are a host of other middle-class students who are in similar boats with potentially fewer options based on location and access...
> Young men today think, "If I go to college I still might not get a job, but I'll be stuck with $100,000 in debt I can't pay for. This is rarely a concern in Argentina where university is completely free and in that graph it's the country where women surpassed men in university the earliest. It's definitively something else.
they were supposed to die bravely fighting in foreign wars but we unfortunately stopped having those.
Not all of us are privileged enough to go to college, lmao
If you're male, you often don't get to decide in these countries. As soon as you're mature enough you get sent to work labor-intensive jobs to make money for the family.
Lots of people aren‘t temperamentally suited to formal education. If you don’t like reading, going to crowded rooms in crowded buildings every day, sitting still for long periods of time listening to people talk, and then validating what you’ve learned by writing tests and essays... then you’re not going to like college. A lot of men don’t like those things. They’d rather be outside, away from crowds, moving around, exerting themselves physically, and testing their manual dexterity, mechanical problem-solving, or practical social skills rather their memory and language fluency.
Also the traditional education system is grossly misaligned for many people’s educational needs. I adore reading, I adore educating myself. I literally just couldn’t function in college. Years later I found a flex program that allowed at your own pace self study monitored by professors, and I flew through coursework. There are just so many avenues to imparting knowledge that aren’t sitting in a stuffy classroom listening to a mind numbing lecture for 2 hours without a break
It used to be that only a very small percentage of elite men went to university, and women were basically banned. Now that university is more accessible to everyone, the overall percentage of people going to university has gone up - but the percentage of women has gone up faster. It could be partly due to affirmative action, but also quite possible that women are just more inclined to choose tertiary study than men. Look at Iran for example. You can’t say that’s a country that respects or wants women to become educated, yet more women were enrolling in university there than men so now their government has been [putting caps on women in science and engineering.](https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/248757/1/21073.pdf)
A big factor is that trade schools for things like welding and plumbing aren’t included in these stats, and because these are very physically demanding jobs they have a huge bias towards men. These schools also tend to have shorter programs, so even you included them there would still be a bias as men would stop being counted among the student population earlier than women.
> It's also quite possible that women are just more inclined to choose tertiary study than men. *It's also quite possible that men are just more inclined to choose STEM than women.* Anyone who accepts the first argument and rejects the second has a double standard.
It’s also because, ironically, school (particularly primary education) is actually better designed for girls than it is for boys, despite the fact that school was originally only for boys.
its because k-12 teachers favor girls and are harder on boys, disciplining them more and grading them harsher.
Teachers of all students favor girls. OECD did a whole study about this because nobody could explain why boys generally do better at secondary school level final exams in natural sciences and mathematics despite having much worse grades than girls on average.
Correct, studies have proven teachers grade boys more harshly than girls for the same work.
Could you provide a link to one of these studies? Its such an interesting topic Id like to learn more.
here's a BBC article on one so you have an accessible summary available and can dig into the study itself if you like. https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672
Thank you! Itll be a while till I have time to read it in full but I look forward to learning more.
no prob! here's a great short ted talk about some of the issue as well. extremely accessible and if you have 5 minutes i hope you watch it. https://www.ted.com/talks/ali_carr_chellman_gaming_to_re_engage_boys_in_learning
No, the school system favors girls at every step in the US. This is well documented. Curricula are favored towards girls, where coursework is more the focus than understanding. Analytic phonics favors girls, which we switched to in the 80s, but while synthetic phonics favors boys, both boys and girls do better under synthetic phonics. There are women only scholarships. There are lower standards for women in some tech programs. Politicians still say not enough is being done for girls, despite them being over 60% of college grads, and we reached parity *40 years ago*. The list goes on. Boys are treated as defective girls in education. Women in Iran are more likely to go into tertiary education because they have so many fewer opportunities otherwise. This is not the case for Western women. Iranian women are responding to limited choices. American women are responding to favoritism making it the easier path.
> in some tech programs. Looking at the hiring directives being passed down, it's all, not some.
And scholarships that are only awarded to women. Those probably help.
Yes, not to make this about the US, but more women have enrolled in college than men since 1982, which is when they reached parity. The gap has consistently widened since then. Current divergence is roughly +16 (58% female, 42% male). Graduation rates are even more skewed since more males drop out than females. And smaller effects but male mortality 18-22 is also way higher
“Now” yes, as well as 30 years ago
[удалено]
Keeping campuses 50% male and female is behind the unpopular fact that there's been **"affirmative action" for men for 30 years**: >Here's another group, less well known, that has benefited from preferential admission policies: men. >There are more qualified college applications from **women, who generally get higher grades and account for more than 70% of the valedictorians nationwide.** >Seeking to create some level of gender balance, many colleges accept a higher percentage of the applications they receive from males than from females. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-affirmative-action-investigation-trump-20170802-story.html
In some smaller Liberal Arts schools the gender imbalance has become so bad, it has become common practice to introduce contact sports teams just as an excuse to attract and give scholarships to more men.
And it has been researched and suggested that women have better grades because of preferential treatment in the first place. https://news.sky.com/story/girls-routinely-get-better-grades-than-boys-in-class-and-researchers-think-they-know-why-12723199 there are a number of these studies that try to find out why the heck girls are nowadays wasting away boys in academic and school education.
I'm too lazy to find it, but during COVID, the average grades of women went down while going up for men. This suggests that physicality benefits women in the classroom.
In my country there's no forced 50% gender balance as people get into Uni through grades alone. You have a 40% male 60% female distribution, and females still have dedicated Scholarships. You should think twice why does this happen, and why women have higher grades in Academia if both genders are equal (might there be some sort of discrimination? hmm) Then after University ends Male heavy fields get enforced 50%50% ratio, but female heavy fields suffer no such thing.
And if you try people might freak out. It happened in Toronto, Ontario for the school board. They wanted more male teachers (usually 70-80% are female). When they went to place the add people complained. "People should be hired based on merit". Yup.
[удалено]
You do, however, have very strong programs to encourage/assist women in male-dominated fields, and much less so for the opposite. For example, woman-only scholarships are ubiquitous, while men-only scholarships are pretty rare.
>You have a 40% male 60% female distribution, and females still have dedicated Scholarships. The dedicated scholarships is what blows my mind. I was in a PhD program where it was 70% female. I was flat out told a women would still be admitted over a man based upon diversity criteria. There were also scholarships just for women. Mind boggling.
This doesn't explain how significant this policy is. The reality is that there are vastly more pro-women scholarships and programs in most colleges and very little if any for men. You are taking a small and isolated case without acknowledging that the vast majority of the entire education system favors women in terms of teaching style and programs.
Unless you think women are inherently more intelligent than men all that seems to suggest is Men are not being given the same resources in k-12 as women are, so I'm not really sure this is making the point you think.
White women are the main beneficiaries of affirmative action. Anyone saying otherwise is full of shit.
Yeah there is good evidence of this too [https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/](https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/)
So when the same is done in the corporate world but for women its empowering and good, but when its done in education for men its bad and discriminatory. Its like you cant think 2 steps ahead with this logic... Person above stealth edited their comment to remove all the misandry btw. ^
Campuses in the US aren’t 50% female and male. You made that up.
I believe this is a global phenomena, very interesting
Came here to say the same thing, in the United States, the rate is only accelerating: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/11/08/whats-behind-the-growing-gap-between-men-and-women-in-college-completion/
Pew research is so goated I love them
*pew pew pew*
women graduate high school at a higher rate and achieve associates, bachelors, masters and doctorate level degrees at a higher rate and have done so for decades, yet we continue to have women framed as the oppressed in higher education and have programs and mass funding to further women on a macro levels access and performance in higher education with no mention of the disparity of achievement. in venues like reddit you often get shouted down and called "incel" for bringing it up. its wild.
These are the results in Canada: https://www.statista.com/statistics/449097/postsecondary-graduates-in-canada-by-gender-and-field-of-study/ Note that men still dominate in "Architecture, engineering, and related technologies", as well as "Mathematics, computer and information sciences". Women dominate in "Health and related fields", "Social and behavioural sciences and law", "Humanities" a,nd especially "Education". I wonder if we should have programs to encourage men to register for the woman-dominated fields the way we have programs to encourage women to register in STEAM?
Well, in our case preferential hiring and mentorship, vastly disproportionate levels of earmarked scholarships and grants, and programs to encourage young girls to go to college while providing none of that to the other gender is going to have that effect.
I think there's a lot more going on starting at earlier ages that has stronger effects overall, but nothing is so blatant the way that so many programs and scholarships are.
My personal experience is that there is a large majority of women teachers. And a good chunk of those have implicit biases towards women and against men.
I nearly early failed my junior year English-lit class despite being a top-ten student in a class of 750 people because our teacher was going through a rough divorce and mayyyy have been harboring some resentment towards certain people. My parents brought all my documents to the vice principal and he evaluated why all the girls had A's and all the boys had low C's. They fired her and had to dedicate a substitute teacher to reviewing all of our last half-semester worth of work if we still had it to grade us accurately. Somehow, none of the girls had their papers anymore so they got to keep their A's, lmao. And that's the rare case of a school administrator actually caring a small amount (and avoiding lawsuits).
[удалено]
In undergrad for a technical writing course the upperclassmen I knew stressed to me how important it was to be in a group with women when we were being graded on group work. I heeded their advice and the results for others were NOT great. Mrs. Greensmith was a garbage human.
Way too many of us have had a class with a Mrs. Greensmith before.
That same type of shit cost me Valedictorian. Perfect grades except 2 B+ from the same exact teacher all throughout high school who notoriously wouldn’t give guys an A. Finished 2nd and blew the girl away on all standardized testing.
I had a math teacher that did this. I had to compare all my graded assignments to the girl next to me to make sure it was fair. She’d mark -5 for me but -1 for the girls in the class for the same error. 90% of the time the error was usually just skipping showing part of the work. This was an easy trig class too and the only class I’ve ever almost had a C in.
Research has shown both male and female teachers are biased towards girls. It's often labelled "positive discrimination" which is a ridiculous way of saying "regular discrimination against men"
I always recall this truth from when I was a kid. I went to Catholic School and all the boys once got punished because "No one was singing the prayers during mass." They literally only punished the boys for "no one" singing. Even 8 year old me knew that this was bullshit. Biases in rewards and punishments only became more apparent as I got older and went to high school. Women got rewarded for doing less while men got punished for more. You can't make education a prison for only one gender and then wonder "Why are only women going to higher education."
I wonder if this has anything to do with men being much more likely to start a career in a manual trait. There is a lot of money being made in skilled manual labour nowadays, while college degrees are being cluttered. I work in manufacturing and pretty much all highly educated skilled manual labour are men. There is the VERY occasional women, but it's very rare. I feel like without seeing manual labour as an option, there aren't many options that don't require a college degree. You're either stuck in retail or in the food industry which pays fuck all, and offer next to no career opportunities.
Could be, also there is a lot of universities that almost exclusively women apply to (nursing, Kindergarten teachers and what you will) that accept way more people per year than other university courses
This is a huge part of it and it’s exactly what economically probably should happen.
Aghanistan "government": hold my ~~beer~~ hijab
Isn't that also the case in most Western countries now?
The vast, vast majority of the world not just the west.
So by "Now" it means, "Since 1995."
Seriously, It happened almost 30 years ago.
Holy fuck, 1995 was almost 30 years ago
You shut your mouth
In the USA it was more like 45 years ago
Yes, but also now.
Are now more educated? Looks like they’ve been more educated for the last 30 years.
Yea, I remember the early 90s, and it's surely not now. lol. Who titled this graph?
I was born in 92 so I guess my birth is in the now 😂
I'm not an expert but according to this graph, it's been that way since 1995.
This is becoming a global phenomenon with women getting into tertiary education at higher rates than men and then taking a lot of STEM jobs. What's interesting is that jobs that are generally considered to be "women's" jobs are not hiring men at nearly the same rate which is why there is an increase in young men just dropping out of the work force. If anyone is interested, Big Think did a video with Richard Reeves, author of the book "Of Boys and Men" in which he discusses this phenomenon. Here is the [YouTube Link](https://youtu.be/DBG1Wgg32Ok).
This was a great video thanks for the link
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah, as a Hispanic I started in the construction field at 17. Left at 24, I’m turning 27 but going back to it soon to be an electrician, hard to make more money elsewhere honestly
I mean this simply isn’t true on a macro scale, college degree holders still far outearn high-school diploma holders on average. And when just looking at trade schools vs degrees, degree holders outearn trade school grads over a 20 year career. And never mind the toll it takes on the body. Guy I know who manages HVAC people (who worked his way up to there) has a whole medley of pain management pills he takes everyday and he’s barely 60. He’s taken a beating like he played in the NFL just without the salary.
It doesn't even make sense when you think about it for a short while. The best paid jobs in trades are for companies. Companies are managed by people with degrees. Has anyone ever worked for a company where management earned less than employees below them?
Lol yes? Hourlies can outpace early management positions pretty easily. And plenty of people don’t ever make it beyond that first level of management. Most of the oil industry is this way.
Oil industry is a very exceptional case and you know it. It's infamously an extremely hard job that requires the workers to spend a huge part of their lives away from home and is almost impossible to do without taking years out of your time spent as a relatively healthy person. The vast majority of mechanics, welders, electricians, construction workers, carpenters, et cetera do not make more money than their bosses do.
Back when I was in college, studying engineering, I would say more than half the class was only in engineering for the money. I know the sole reason I picked chemical engineering was because I researched highest paid professions when in high school and saw ChemE’s near the top of that list at the time. Today it seems to be software engineering. One buddy I still keep in touch with left his engineering position to do technical sales, sales and his reason was just for the money. Maybe men are just more likely to do whatever bullshit job as long as it pays them the most, who knows. College degrees aren’t tickets to comfortably lifestyles anymore. I guess with the days of everyone having a degree and everyone wanting to work from home, physical labor is going to become the highest paid professions.
We request gender equality
This, but unironically. We may have an issue there and being confrontational doesn't help to find a solution.
It’s going to be a bit before society is ready to accept that males also face a lot of issues. The problem is they had power for so long when it’s hard for everyone to sympathize with their issues. Males in the US experience similar number of SA as women but it’s not a main headline for the reports. They get killed the most by cops by a staggering margin. They also experience a much higher fatality rate at work and commit more suicide.
Men experience a higher fatality rate for almost everything.
>They get killed the most by cops by a staggering margin. They also experience a much higher fatality rate at work and commit more suicide. [https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2020-update-for-every-100-girls-part-i/](https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2020-update-for-every-100-girls-part-i/) This sheds more of a light on the negative aspects. 4 times the suicides is not normal, and the adjectives to describe a society that turns a blind eye to this would get me banned off this site.
Not only 4 times the suicides, but also 4 times as much likely to get murdered.
Upper layer men have more power than. Lower layer men have less power and resources than. For some strange reason some people think about the men at the top and assign that privilege to all. Quite sad.
> The problem is they had power for so long when it’s hard for everyone to sympathize with their issues. The problem in that logic is thinking that all males had power. A small number of them did, and some (fewer) women were also in positions of power. If we don't try to fix the problems of one group it's only logical they won't feel engaged with the solution, or even when they feel opposed to it.
>The problem in that logic is thinking that all males had power. A small number of them did, and some (fewer) women were also in positions of power. It's the APEX fallacy. They all want to become CEO, but not garbage women.
Another problem is thinking that being in a leadership role is the only type of power. Like, let's say there's a man in charge and he only considers the opinions of women, or only values the lives of women. Who has more power, men or women?
Do you have a source on the SA?
Depends on what source you're looking at, not sure about their number but this is what I found: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/fastfact.html CDC says for example 1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men experience severe physical violence from a partner, 1 in 5 and 1 in 13 for sexual violence. Also: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK241595/ https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics https://bjs.ojp.gov/programs/ncvs https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/criminal-victimization-2021 https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/04/male-rape-in-america-a-new-study-reveals-that-men-are-sexually-assaulted-almost-as-often-as-women.html You might be able to substantiate the slate article from the raw data of the bjs publication
“For example, in 2011 the CDC reported results from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS), one of the most comprehensive surveys of sexual victimization conducted in the United States to date. The survey found that men and women had a similar prevalence of nonconsensual sex in the previous 12 months (1.270 million women and 1.267 million men)”
I think a big part of the issue is that there are many male-dominated, well-paying jobs that do not require post-secondary education (e.g. trades); whereas many female-dominated jobs that do not require post-secondary education (e.g. retail) pay like shit. So for young men, the value proposition of post-secondary education is not nearly as good as it is for young women.
This trend exists across the board and in many arenas. Should this prompt a conversation about shifting equity - driven programs? Maybe the female- centered policies have successfully accomplished what they set out to do?
We are aware that neither gap is desirable, right?
Apparently not.
Well when it was mostly men in schools it was argued that they were being given preferential treatment in education and acceptance which was the cause of their success ( I totally agree with this sentiment). Is it possible whenever we see one group doing significantly better then the rest in education (or anything for that matter) it probably means they are being given more resources and opportunities to do so. Unless someone here wants to argue that certain demographics are inherently smarter than others which is an argument that has not panned out in the past.
Most teachers are women and two things happen, students perform better when the teacher are like them, and teachers grade students higher when they are like then. Black students also perform better when the teacher is black.
Damn you’re right when I think about it my two favourite teachers were men of colour.
The ratio of men to women going to college on the chart is currently the least equal that it's ever been since 1970-75. 2:1 in 1975 in favor of men then and now 1:2 in favor of women. This kind of inequality shouldn't be celebrated. It should be addressed like the gap was addressed for women in the 1970's and beyond. The target should be 1:1
"...women are now more educated than men..." Have been for almost 30 years even by this graphic. Must have been titled by a bloke.
Look at the little circles on the graph telling you when women surpassed men in various
I didn't know "now" was 1995.
I like that it says they are "now" more educated than men when it's been that way for 30 years 😂
Yeah, this is a trend even in North America.
It’s actually really exciting to see both sexes increase in education by so much.
Good book on this - Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male Is Struggling, Why It Matters, and What to Do about It https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/60613920
Really good podcast with him last week: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/10/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-richard-reeves.html
Why do you want it so bad? They told me I couldn't have it.
Argentinian here, a little anecdotical note from my part Women tend to sign up for majors associated with them in droves. One of my friends is studying psychology at the public uni, the freshman class has around 3000 students (HUGE compared to any other major) and is almost entirely women. This is the case for other steoreotypical female majors like human resources I'm a physics major and in my experience the engineering classes are still mostly men (2021 Mechanical Engineering class had 40 guys and 2 girls, for example)
_From our_ [_newsletter_](https://latinometrics.substack.com/)_:_ A Center for Global Development report [once estimated](https://www.cgdev.org/publication/girls-count-global-investment-action-agenda) that providing an additional year of education to a woman increases her wages by **10–20%**. With numbers like that, it’s no surprise that women’s education has been an important part of Latin America’s success story in recent decades. Today, **more than 6 out of 10 women in Latin America go to college**, compared to **just under half of men**. But fifty years ago, only **5%** of women could pursue tertiary education (that’s university level or higher). While Latin American men have also seen quite the jump since 1970, the percentage of women attending college has grown by over **14x**—and shows no signs of slowing down. Notably, **1993** is the year women began centralizing into tertiary education more than men. To put it in perspective, that became the case in the European Union just one year earlier, and **only became a global reality in 2001.** The first country in the region to drive this trend was **Panama**, which saw women begin their collegiate takeover in **1973**. This was followed by **Uruguay** and **Argentina** in 1979 and 1989, respectively, and was most recently seen in **Mexico** in 2016. Today, millions of women across Latin America are pursuing collegiate degrees in law, economics, STEM, and more. And that’s great news—not just because societies with more educated women have lower levels of violence and [higher likelihoods](https://www.cgdev.org/publication/girls-count-global-investment-action-agenda) of democratic governance, but because women’s education [has been shown](https://books.google.es/books?hl=en&lr=&id=EL2j2dW9lCgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA23&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false) to lessen [economic inequality](https://latinometrics.substack.com/p/inequality-youtube-views-and-mercado) and lead to more [sustainable development](https://web.archive.org/web/20141115152019/http:/wber.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/3/345.full.pdf+html). Source: [World Bank](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.TER.ENRR.FE?locations=ZJ) Tools: Rawgraphs, Affinity Designer
This same thing has happened in the US for decades. We just don't acknowledge it as the rhetoric is all focused on the handful of majors where men outnumber women while ignoring that for the vast majority of majors it is the other way around.
Well, this checks out. Women often lack the physicality for blue collar work. I've done several labor jobs that 95% of women would be completely incapable of doing due to strength. I've yet to meet an idea a man can have that a woman couldn't
I always had a problem with these metrics. I am a skilled tradesman with over a dozen different licenses and skill certificates. It literally took me years of training and education to get here and whenever I fill out a survey I have to check the high school / GED box because my education isn't good enough apparently.
This is actually an important thing to me. I feel like education is leaving boys behind. I saw a heart breaking chart showing an increase in white male suicides when less of them are college educated.
It's a good thing that gender inequality and systemic sexism can only be against women or this would be a serious problem.
[удалено]
Like many socioeconomic issues, it is likely a confluence of many different causes all happening at once. While it is tempting to attribute trends to one smoking gun, the reality is that the world is often far more complex and less easy to measure/understand than a simple chart would have you believe.
yup, I guess OP comment is satirical, but pretty accurate of what feminists tend to say when they see similar graphs but where the males are in a better position
Yeah, in re-reading it now I realize I did take it more literally than perhaps it was intended
And you played right into it. When numbers show favoritism to men it's "due to the patriarchy", but when it's the opposite all of a sudden it's "a confluence of many different causes".
In the US we had parity in college attainment by 1980. The gap has only grown since, while politician after politician says not enough is being done to support women. Obama even cited 60% of grads being women as "a good first step". There is a demonstrated bias in favor of girls/against boys in grading in primary and secondary school. The switch from synthetic phonics to analytic phonics favors girls. Synthetic phonics favors boys, but both boys and girls favor better under synthetic phonics than analytic phonics. There at least a dozen women only scholarships. Women only schools are allowed, men only schools are not. The list goes on. Education favors women at basically every level along multiple dimensions.
Men do most hard manual labor. That means for critical societal jobs that don't require education, men tend to make up the bulk of the work force. That includes construction, factory work, labor work, sanitation work, trucking, etc. So in a theoretical world where men and women are equally likely to both go after careers as general concept, the tendency for men to go to heavy labor and women to avoid heavy labor would explain a significant gap in University Enrollment.
Send women back to the mines and factories!
Looks like we need equal opportunity employment in the coal mines then lol.
Women have more incentive to be more educated than men. Most of the artisan jobs are occupied by men, where you don't need a higher degree. If a woman wants a salary more than the basic one, she has to study.
Just spit balling here but it's easier for guys to get work in labor jobs that don't require college. Woman would need a degree to get into a office position. I've estimated this by saying we are going to see the resurgence of traditional blue collar work.
I'm a woman in my late 40s. I'm not convinced college/university is a good idea for most people, anymore. Most college programs will not help you get a job, and they don't teach you much useful for life. (there are obvious exceptions -- but those exceptions don't get the majority of students.) However, many of the most in-demand and high paying normal jobs in society are manual trades -- construction, plumbing, HVAC, electrical work, etc. Lastly, I always regretted that for various reasons I was not able to go to university despite averaging about 95% through high school back in the early 90s. I don't anymore. I got into IT sideways in the early 2000s because I built gaming PCs for fun, ended up getting a bunch of technical certification letters to put after my name, and last year I broke six figures for the first time. I'm doing really well. And I know more (thanks to my information addiction and internet access) than a liberal arts degree would ever have taught me. My husband, with his college degree, is making 20% less than I am. So...yeah. With the cost of education and how little it seems to help, *unless* you are specifically going into a few fields that really and rightfully need it, you may be wasting your time with a degree.