If you claim that the only relevant variables in gender earnings statistics is gender and nothing that comes in later than gender is relevant (and so choices are not) you'll have to accept that you cannot use those statistics to claim that the cause is discrimination.
He's trying to say that women with agency would choose not to work somewhere where discrimination is claimed to exist. But we have to balance this claim against the reality that women have made great headway into professions which focus on people rather than things.
-
-
The vicious circle comes into play here. Women don't enter engineering and tech in as great numbers as they enter medicine and education. Discrimination is posited to be the cause. Then it claimed that women don't enter those areas because they hear it discriminates against them
-
Of course, women can use their agency to enter professions where discrimination is said to be rife or not to enter them. Given that nearly all prestigious occupations were male dominated at one time, it seems likely that they did the former but for people-orientated jobs.
-
While discrimination could certainly still be a factor in the areas in which they are not well represented, the fact that it has divided this way does tend to suggest that women are using their own agency to pursue their own interests which have been measured & replicated well.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.