Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- From: Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:21:28 -0700
In article <iVjgm.112987$ZN.76337@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Society@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
"Sid9" <sid9@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:h5fldv$th8$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Society" wrote...
Andre Lieven wrote...
John Doe wrote:
If women are equal to men... Why are there so few women
in high places in our (United States) government
and in our big companies?
Because relatively few women want to do the hard work
in order to achieve such positions.
Quite so. And there's also relatively few women who
_have to_ "do the hard work" to achieve the wealth, power,
and influence of such positions. John Doe would do well
to consider these facts: (1) it wasn't a Ms. _Billie_ Gates who started
Microsoft even though there was no
impediment to a woman doing so (ask Sandra Kurtzig)
and (2) not long after completing finishing school,
a woman named Melinda married and instantly got access
to the lifestyle of a Microsoft billionaire.
"...She (Melinda French Gates) was valedictorian of her class at Ursuline
Academy of Dallas in 1982. She earned a bachelor degree in computer
science and economics from the prestigious Duke University in 1986 and an
MBA from Duke's Fuqua School of Business in 1987, and [...] met Bill Gates
in 1987 at a Microsoft press event in Manhattan..."
They married on 1994
Thanks, Sid9. Like I said, Melinda completed finishing school
and then obtained the lifestyle of a Microsoft billionaire without
having to do the work and take the risk of earning it herself.
I note that you dropped the "not long after..."
Don't let a name like "Duke University" mask the fact that
functionally such a place serves as a finishing school for
most of the young females who attend. I'm confident Melinda
understood her production possibilities curve looong
before she ever set foot in any formal economics class. ;-)
I'm also certain that only a small minority of the women
who graduate from Duke in the 80s got dual degrees in computer science
and economics. That would differentiate Melinda Gates from
the vast majority of female undergraduates at Duke. I was teaching
computer science at a university in the mid 80s, and most CS courses for
majors had about a 10:1 male:female student ratio.
Today's reality is that women have more
socially acceptable options than do men:
She can work full time.
She can stay at home full time.
She can work part time and stay at home part time.
His socially acceptable options are:
He can work full time.
That certainly applies to married couples. Lifestyle expectations
may dictate that both work full time.
I'm not sure to what degree it applies to the 24% of the population
that has never married. For them the options may
be:
They can work full time
They can work part time (at a lower lifestyle)
They can stay at home with their parents
20-somethings living at home with their parents may not
completely socially acceptable---but it's happening more
these days than it was a few decades ago.
(After Warren Farrell in _Why Men Are The Way They Are_)
That book was written 15 years ago. I wonder how 'socially
acceptable' will change in the next 15 years.
The way things are working in the USA, it won't be long before
Oops! That just blew up Joe Doakes' premise of "if women
are equal to men." Just look around you. Being "equal to men"
would be a step _down_ for women.
A hallmark of Western culture is that women have more options
than men. Neither a masters of business administration nor even a
bachelor's degree in economics is necessary to grasp that people
who have multiple ways of obtaining a comfortable lifestyle
will be less likely to take the same path as people who have
just one difficult way to obtain that lifestyle.
there are more women than men moving up in the ranks of the
college-educated mid-level jobs. At that point it may become
more socially acceptable for a woman to marry below her
economic level and gain a house-husband. Whether or not both
work will depend, as it does today, on their desired life style
and whether they can accomplish it on one salary.
Mark Borgerson
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- From: Andrew Usher
- Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- Prev by Date: Re: That feminism can accurately be described as ...
- Next by Date: Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- Previous by thread: Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- Next by thread: Re: Women allowed to vote, to weaken our populace?
- Index(es):