Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-10/women-stand-out-in-otherwise-middling-u-s-december-jobs-report

by hhs • 7 years ago

249 271 7 years ago

samspenc• 7 years ago

My key takeaways from the article:

* "Women held 50.04% of nonfarm payroll positions in December, the highest share since 2010."

* "Over the past year alone, they’ve taken on a greater share of positions traditionally held by men: they make up 13.8% of mining and logging jobs, up from 12.6% a year earlier, as well as a growing share of manufacturing work..."

* "Women have the biggest presence in education and health services -- holding more than three-quarters of those positions -- and government services with about 58%. They account for 56% of positions in financial activities."

deeg• 7 years ago

I find this fairly astounding. The typical stay-at-home parent is the mother and while it's getting closer to parity I don't think it's anywhere near even. For that reason alone I would expect more men in the work force. What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier?

tmpz222• 7 years ago

Well, it may be interesting to look at what industries ballooned during this time. Video games, weed, online sexual services, ...

klaudius• 7 years ago

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-young-...

vixen99• 7 years ago

"Perhaps one should not dwell too long, however, on the question of what type of leisure low-skill young men are engaging in. The more important fact remains that leisure is slowly replacing work in their lives, as immigrants replace them in the labor force."

downerending2• 7 years ago

I'm seeing a lot of this in my extended family. If society isn't telling you that you have a primary role in creating and supporting a family, and that you're necessary for the future of society itself, it turns out that you need a lot less money to survive, and you have a lot more time on your hands.

belorn• 7 years ago

I dislike this kind of cheap generalization which only look skin deep and don't even try to find common behavior between genders.

Young men spend about an 2 hours on games per day, and the numbers for young women is much lower. Young women however spend about 2 hours more on their phones per day more than men. Something seems very similar here if we look at the two activities together rather then in isolation.

I would instead ask what gendered benefit men get from gaming, and women from doing social activities on their phones, and I would guess the answer has something to do with inter-gender competition and status.

earlINmeyerkeg4• 7 years ago

You know, it'd be nice if they'd look at the cultural aspects of gaming as opposed to just assuming all videogames are bad. It's like being in the 1920's criticizing someone spending time reading as opposed to working in a mill.

But what can you expect from a clearly biased news source that, while possibly not wrong, is likely not going to give any benefit of the doubt to people who live life differently from the "good 'ol christian boy" fashion.

dfxm12• 7 years ago

No one knows exactly why this is happening, though declining demand for low-skill work seems to be a factor.

What happens as this continues to decline?

xenihn• 7 years ago

The article specifies payroll positions. I don't know what that means exactly, but I assume it would discount sharing-economy jobs (are we still calling them that?).

Bartweiss8• 7 years ago

It excludes "unincorporated self-employed" people, which I think covers much of the gig economy. Even more relevantly, it means many construction workers, most painters, etc. are excluded.

lopmotr• 7 years ago

Some are being "proprietors, private household employees, unpaid volunteers, farm employees and the unincorporated self-employed." From a link somebody else posted https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2019/july/nonfarm-payr...

Unincorporated self-employed sounds like tradesmen, laborers, and some kinds of professionals which is a lot of men.

Gunax• 7 years ago

and uber drivers.

Bartweiss8• 7 years ago

I went looking, and found that "unincorporated self-employed" is exactly as you say, and is 2/3 male. Farm employees are roughly 3/4 male. Soldiers (~90% male) are also excluded.

"Nonfarm payrolls" was never meant to be a gender-balanced stat, it just excludes the hardest to track jobs. Which is fine for comparison over time, but makes 50% a meaningless metric.

munk-a• 7 years ago

I wonder if women are tending toward holding multiple jobs more often than men - and since women live longer on average they may simply be working more years of their lives then men.

epicureanideal• 7 years ago

Apparently this was also true in 2009 and 2010 or at least for parts of those years based on the graph in the article.

Also, it doesn't seem to distinguish between part-time and full-time. So a mother working part-time when her kids are at school would count the same as a full-time worker.

phkahler• 7 years ago

> What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier?

Some are living in their parents basement until they're 30 to 40. It has been hypothesized that with the breakdown of families in the US, men are giving up, and that includes efforts to build a stable foundation for their family. See MGTOW but dont read too much, it can be kind of depressing.

bmarquez• 7 years ago

Purely anecdotal, but some men I know who haven't started families* are coasting along and are less aggressive to seek career opportunities. Uber, part-time work, etc. Why put your nose to the grindstone if you don't need to provide anymore?

*either by choice or because they don't live up to society's standards (e.g. hypergamy)

bitL3• 7 years ago

Do you think US is moving towards Japan? I.e. a significant population of herbivore men (60%?) that get no benefit from associating with women, losing this motivational signal and dropping out of society?

danbolt7• 7 years ago

I agree with Esther Perel's thinking[1] that the next century is going to involve a broadening on what society deems a positive life is for straight, cis men. In the same way that we consider it acceptable for women to express themselves or live differently than the gender roles of the past, I think we'll start to do the same for men. I already see this with my millennial or genZ peers.

It's not uncommon to read comments on Hacker News or twitter from men feeling that they seen as less valid for doing less traditional activities[2][3] (eg: caring for children, prioritizing their careers less, being less traditionally forward, etc.) and I think society is going to need to change to acknowledge this better for both men and women.

[1] https://www.psychotherapynetworker.org/blog/details/1594/est...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21775631

[3] https://twitter.com/SpaceCptZemo/status/1215034934319964160

EDIT: Am I allowed to interpret downvotes as "nah i dont want it that way the world is Malthusian"? Nothing would make me happier.

Impossible• 7 years ago

Another anecdotal point is I know men that do have families or partners but the woman is the primary or only breadwinner. Sometimes they are active stay at home dads, sometimes they are coasting/given up or in school or working on a startup but in all cases they are financially supported by a woman.

anon90015• 7 years ago

Some are living in their parents basement until they're 30 to 40.

I understand this is considered a bad thing, and it makes sense at a societal level, but honestly it sounds like a pretty amazing life. Maybe that would have been boring and depressing pre-internet, but it seems pretty good now.

I know one dude who essentially grifted his way into the disability system, and I've watched him go from an anxious mess to a budding artist, literally living in his mom's basement. All he does is read the internet, take classes, and paint. His art keeps getting better. If he lives in his parent's basement for another decade, he might emerge as a great artist. Frankly, I'm kind of jealous.

The obvious down side is that he has a hard time finding a date, and family interaction is not optional. IMO those are both relatively minor penalties for a lifetime of freedom.

The real inexplicable thing here is how parents are letting this happen? I was never under any illusion that I'd be able to receive indefinite support from my parents, and society has given me every possible indication that this isn't an acceptable strategy.

Maybe we need an acceptable way for people who can't mentally handle work to be able to exist in society.

edgarvaldes• 7 years ago

Non-american here so pardon my ignorance: Why is "basement" so common in this case? I mean, the whole "living with parents" and the basement thing.

syshum2• 7 years ago

Not all men that have chosen not to have a family are "living in their parent's basement" or have "given up" on life.

I made the choice about 20 years ago to never marry, and never have children. I own my home, have an amazing career full of growth and future potential and currently am in the top 20% of wage earners.

Had I made a different choice 20 years ago I likely would be married with 2 kids right now, and be making significantly less income likely living paycheck to paycheck struggling to pay rent

What is depressing to me is the belief that family is the only way to have fulfillment in life, and if you choose not to have children you have "given up" on life

bonoboTP2• 7 years ago

As a non-American, what's up with this basement meme? Do American homes have furnished rooms in the literal basement or is it just a joke? Or are they like half basements with small windows?

Diederich• 7 years ago

Honestly not picking, but this seems insightful, so I'd like to hear more.

"living in their parents basement until they're 30 to 40" and then "breakdown of families in the US"

I know you're not necessarily equating those two, but do you think they're related? Thanks!

iagovar4• 7 years ago

Depressed, committing suicide or just doing nothing. But apparently nobody cares.

billfruit• 7 years ago

Or being in prison.

jaywalk2• 7 years ago

Not only does nobody care, but some celebrate it.

cmdshiftf47• 7 years ago

Depressed, committing suicide or just doing nothing. But apparently nobody cares.

We've had a decade+ of men being told they're useless oppressors, who've earned nothing for themselves, whose "time is up", and that they haven't a place in the future. Couple that with the loss of shared identity in general, the breakdown of the family, the bias in the divorce process, the disappearance of purposeful work and more and it's no surprise that we're in the situation we're in now.

The ever-changing "ideals" and "values" we're building modern society on are as brittle as a house of cards.

A note: I'm a happily married man with a career I enjoy and am optimistic for my own future, so the above isn't coming from some sense of ingrained / developed resentment, merely observation.

IfOnlyYouKnew4• 7 years ago

They'd get a lot more sympathy if the first association people have isn't stuff like gamergate and QAnon.

uncle_j2• 7 years ago

Why does it have to be even? Why does it matter?

Equal Outcome != Equality of Opportunity.

Unfortunately the two are often conflated in an attempt to imply there is some form of discrimination taking place by people with nefarious motives.

astura• 7 years ago

The comment you are replying to does not say it has to be even

closeparen• 7 years ago

This the sort of question economists study, and reading their output may be more informative than forum comments. Keyword is "declining labor force participation rate."

40acres• 7 years ago

A lot of them are on disability or in jail.

wyldfire• 7 years ago

What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier?

The article claims:

... close to 100% of working-age men used to participate in back in the 1950s. Now that figure is 89%, and had been falling up until 2014. Economists cite multiple reasons: lower demand and wages for unskilled uneducated workers, retiring baby boomers, and an opioid crisis that disproportionately affects men.

watwut7• 7 years ago

People have less children then before and are waaay more likely to go back to work after being stay at home temporary.

The stay at home moms might not be that large portion of population.

WillPostForFood2• 7 years ago

There are about 9 million stay at home moms. That does seem small to me.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/24/stay-at-hom...

russdill• 7 years ago

Keep in mind, the US population is 51% female. So there is still a higher percentage of employed males vs employed females.

Sharlin• 7 years ago

However that may be simply because there are more retired women than retired men (the former living longer than the latter).

jl27182• 7 years ago

There are ~5% more males by birth, ~100% more males by Visa, and ~40% more males by illegal immigration.

notadoc2• 7 years ago

What are men doing if not working? On disability? Homeless? Retiring earlier?

Committing suicide?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...

https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

It's a horrible observation, as men are obviously in crisis.

There's a large percentage of working age men not in the labor force too.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS15000001

https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2018/beyond-bls/mens-declining-...

Some perhaps they lost prior jobs and did not regain positions of parity, now they're disenfranchised, socially isolated, in some form of despair, or even homeless.

Anecdotally, the homeless populations I see everywhere in the west coast are 99% males aged 25-50.

z9e• 7 years ago

It’s sad not seeing this get more attention in today’s politics.

irrational2• 7 years ago

Playing video games, watching porn, etc.? At least a lot of the articles I see about men leaving (or never entering) the workforce - entertainment seems to be the main way of filling up their time.

bargle0• 7 years ago

My gut says prison.

outime• 7 years ago

From what I anecdotally see (outside US) some men got frustrated with society and just don’t want to work. Everything they need seem to be found at home, similar to the hikimori in Japan albeit not so extreme. It’s sometimes (so not always) related to dating failures. I could argue that dating is getting increasingly difficult for the heterosexual male and that paired with bad jobs would make some men think twice about participating in the society game. Some other people linked articles/studies talking about this so my non-scientific observation can be supported somewhat.

RenRav• 7 years ago

Are farm workers excluded because it's easier? Wouldn't matter I suppose just curious.

css• 7 years ago

obtaining accurate farming employment numbers is complicated by:

    - Self-employment
    - Unpaid family employment
    - Part-time or hobby farmers
    - Other partnerships

https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2019/july/nonfarm-payr...

vkou• 7 years ago

Not to mention that a lot of farming is done by undocumented workers, who don't necessarily appear on payrolls. It's hard to find people to do hard, dangerous, exhausting work for so little pay.

Ohn06• 7 years ago

Isn't the true for other industries as well though, not just farming?

creaghpatr• 7 years ago

Farm vs. Non-farm is a pretty common distinction when talking about labor markets if I'm not mistaken.

sb057• 7 years ago

In addition to other mentioned reasons, farm work is also extremely seasonal.

jacquesm• 7 years ago

The more interesting thing is the distribution of income. I would happily bet that there still is a considerable gap between women on average and men on average and that the total amount taken home by that majority is significantly less than the total amount for the men.

nkkollaw6• 7 years ago

Women tend to choose jobs that pay less.

They're on average more interested in people, so they tend to choose to become nurses, teachers, etc., while men are interested in things and become software developers, engineers, etc.

I have no idea why income HAS TO be distributed equally. Unless you want to force women to become software developers..? But why.

augbog• 7 years ago

I would assume if someone did gap analysis they would factor that in. It isn't about the wholistic are women making more or less than men. Rather it's the equality of are women who are the same role of men making the same. There shouldn't be a difference there.

swalsh2• 7 years ago

The article is stating the exact opposite. In the past, this was true... but it seems like women are now starting to start participate in jobs Men have traditionally dominated.

kypro• 7 years ago

I have no idea why income HAS TO be distributed equally. Unless you want to force women to become software developers..? But why.

Some people don't believe that men and women are (on average) slightly different so to them any gender inequality is evidence of fowl play.

They don't see it as forcing women to do things they don't want, but righting a social wrong.

maerF0x0• 7 years ago

Here are a couple sides of the arguments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcDrE5YvqTs -- According to the DOL there is a much smaller than typically quoted wage gap, and there are additional variables not accounted for.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-pernicious-science-of-james-...

Also WRT forcing women: "Uncle" Bob Martin observes that at one time programmers were 50% women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecIWPzGEbFc

wayoutthere3• 7 years ago

Ignoring everything else wrong with your post, I'll just point out that most software developers were originally women before about 1960 -- it was seen as "woman's work" because it didn't require physical labor. Women were significant contributors to the development of computing from the very beginning -- in fact, "software" as a concept was invented by a woman [1]. The profession didn't become high-status or highly-paid until after men took over (and shut out the women by redefining it as "men's work").

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace

magduf21• 7 years ago

One problem I see with this is your example of nurses. Women went into nursing in the past frequently because it was open to them, and being a doctor wasn't. That's changed, and now the only reason to be a nurse is because the educational requirements are much lower, and consequently, there's a shortage of nurses because who wants to do that instead of being a doctor and making more money, unless they don't want to spend as long in school and rack up as much debt?

Also, nurses are some of the least empathetic people around. Don't be fooled by the common misconception; they're usually not caring people at all. "Nurse Ratchet" is not that far from the truth. My mom was a nurse, and I've met many others; they're just not the nicest people around. And there's a good reason for this: a highly empathetic person would not last very long as a nurse. They'd get burned out very quickly, after seeing so many sick and dying people up close day after day.

IfOnlyYouKnew4• 7 years ago

No, men decided to pay less for jobs often chosen by women.

jedberg6• 7 years ago

Women tend to choose jobs that pay less.

This is accurate, but not for the reasons you have given.

Think of it this way. Within a profession, say "lawyer", there are different career paths. One career path involves a lot of travel away from home, and one does not. Because traditionally women are expected to be home for children, women tend to more often select the path that involves staying at home more, which tends to also pay less.

So then, when you look at "lawyer", you see a pay gap, and then you dive in and see that the women have chosen the "lower paying job".

But that still doesn't account for the entire pay gap. It still leaves about 7% difference.

That last 7% is what people are concerned about. That women doing the same job with the same experience get about 7% less on average than men, depending on the field. In some fields (I believe medicine is one), there is no pay gap between women and men with equal experience (although there is still an opportunity gap, where men will be promoted more often with equal qualifications).

Then there is tech, where there is a pay gap between people with equal experience. I've seen this personally first-hand (but at least when the manager was called out on it he made it right and gave the woman a raise, but before being called out, it didn't even occur to him that he was making that decision).

I have no idea why income HAS TO be distributed equally.

Because people doing the same work should get paid the same for doing it. And because you shouldn't be barred from a career for reasons that aren't related to the job (ie. your gender).

Given that women are 1/2 the population, and given the sample size, women and men should on average be making the same amount of money. But they aren't. And study after study show that the reason is bias against women, and not women's choices.

Don't you think that is something that should be changed?

rjkennedy982• 7 years ago

What about marriage? If a man makes more money and he is married is HE talking more? Isn't that income split (or in reality spent by the women)? I have never understood why data on married men is treated as if the men are single and it's their money alone.

hadesenia4• 7 years ago

A lot of couples keep separate finances. Money is one of the biggest reasons couples split up, after all. While my boyfriend and I aren’t married, we do split our household contributions and pay from our own accounts.

I think it is also interesting to study the money men and women bring separately into their relationship and how that plays into relationship dynamics.

watwut7• 7 years ago

This is anecdotal, but men I know have more expensive hobbies then women. Men are more eager to buy what they want while women save money more and feel bad about unnecessary purchases.

Think gaming equipment, steam sales for games they will never play, flying, cars, tech, 3d printer and what not.

Compared to that, feminine hobbies are few bucks once in a while.

mrwebmaster• 7 years ago

On average, there is no hourly pay gap for unmarried women and men without kids. After they get married, there is an hourly salary gap, and this gap is even larger for married parents. As hours worked per day increase, the hourly pay rate also increases and married men spend much more time at their jobs (on average). Hourly pay also increases as experience increases. Married men with children spend more time at their jobs (vs. married women w/ children, on average), so they accumulate more experience over the years. The gap increases when they get older (on average).

wayoutthere3• 7 years ago

This is the same reason I see trotted out by companies looking to defend gender imbalances; but the real issue is that the higher up you go in a profession, the less likely women are to be promoted. Even without kids. And these days in the US, "women with children" only get a few weeks off when they have children before having to return to work. Suggesting the difference in career outcomes is due to this time is ill-informed at best.

nightski2• 7 years ago

I don't have data to back this up, but it's something I am now going to try to research. However I feel that there is a slight trend away from your traditional payroll job into independent small business careers (youtuber, blogger, streamer, freelancer, etc..). I'm curious how that affects these numbers.

Causality1• 7 years ago

If I had to take a guess I'd say almost not at all. For example, Twitch only has 27,000 streamers with the Partner status, and only a fraction of them make a living off of it. There's enough to be a cultural phenomena but not significantly change the workforce.

ghaff• 7 years ago

Freelance writers, independent consultants/contractors/tradespeople, and some professional jobs like those are probably more significant. But I agree those other categories are almost certainly in the noise for actually making a living. (Though it's not clear that any of these non-salaried jobs count here at all.)

claudiulodro• 7 years ago

I'm pretty sure self-employed people count towards those numbers, unless they're making hobby-level income.

What's your theory, though? I don't follow what exactly you're getting at? Which gender is supposedly better at those endeavors? Are there a ton of men trying to be successful online entrepreneurs and not making any money so they don't get counted in the workforce stats?

nightski2• 7 years ago

No I'm just saying that the traditional methods of using employment statistics may be based on outdated assumptions.

They specifically say "payroll positions" in the article so that would leave me to believe it does not include self employed individuals.

tribune• 7 years ago

"[Women] make up 13.8% of mining and logging jobs, up from 12.6% a year earlier..."

That seems like a huge recomposition in a single year. What caused this?

arkh2• 7 years ago

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics: "All employees"

So I'll hazard a guess about a change in what part of those mining and logging industries hired: less manual workers and more office ones as they get consolidated into bigger conglomerates. But I may be wrong.

If I read this correctly: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm in 2018 you had

  - 2.6% women for logging workers
  - 5% for Mining machine operators

bluGill3• 7 years ago

Assuming a 25 year career, you replace 4% of the workforce every year, so just hiring an even number of females would be more than that. (I don't know what the retirement age is for loggers, I'd guess younger than 65 based on it being a union physical labor job)

shiado• 7 years ago

The labor force participation rates for men and women are currently at 69.2% and 57.7% respectively. They arbitrarily exclude farming positions but cite mining, logging, manufacturing, transportation, and warehouse roles traditionally occupied by men. This article doesn't really seem to paint a full or accurate picture.

missosoup• 7 years ago

So the total labor force participation rate is ... 126.9% ?

edit: ok, ok, I got confused with the wording, I get it, you can stop hammering with downvotes. I'll leave the above up as my mark of shame.

axlee• 7 years ago

69.2% of all men are in the labor force, and 57.7% of all women are in the labor force.

boomboomsubban4• 7 years ago

I doubt the exclusion of farming positions is arbitrary, the area is full of self/family employment and illegal employment that probably caused the exclusion. It does paint a false narrative though.

dooglius• 7 years ago

I think it has more to do with the fact that farm employment is seasonal.

asdff• 7 years ago

The family farm model died out decades and decades ago fwiw.

Bartweiss8• 7 years ago

It's a longstanding measurement, yeah. And it's not actually just excluding agriculture, the definition removes a whole cluster of jobs that are especially hard to track accurately, including all of nonprofit employment and unincorporated self-employment (i.e. most of construction, handymanning, etc.)

Of course, farm labor and unincorporated self-employment are heavily male, and nonprofit work is heavily female. So it's a useful statistic for accurate change-over-time data, but stories like this treating 50% as an inherently meaningful tipping point are wildly misleading.

AnimalMuppet• 7 years ago

Wait, so women make up the majority of the non-farm labor force, but the labor force participation rate is 12% higher for men? How does that work? Are 12% of men either in the military or on disability? Or what?

alexis_fr• 7 years ago

2.3 million men are in prison in USA. The definition is “divided by the total noninstitutionalized, civilian working-age population.”

As a counter-example, average IQ at the workplace is 110. Where’s everyone under IQ90? Injured, suicide, drug addicts etc.

tmpz222• 7 years ago

Roughly 1 million men serve in the US Military (1.29 million total, ~82% of which is male).

[1] https://www.cfr.org/article/demographics-us-military

Bartweiss8• 7 years ago

Great question, I just went digging.

I found three big factors. First, the "labor force" has no age cap, so there are lots more women alive than men. Second, lots of adult men are in the military or prison, so equal numbers of jobs would mean higher male labor force participation. Third, "nonfarm payrolls" doesn't just mean nonfarm, and excludes more employed men than women. But there's one big issue with nonprofit labor I couldn't sort out.

(Details in the child post.)

empath75• 7 years ago

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nonfarmpayroll.asp

IfOnlyYouKnew4• 7 years ago

FWIW I see "non-farm employment" rather often when anything related to unemployment happens. From what I gather, it's how all the data has been categorized forever.

So while I can't give you the reasoning behind it, and don't know if it's still valid or now just being done to make the data comparable, I can assure you choosing this statistic wasn't a bad-faith attempt to manipulate.

freepor• 7 years ago

Farm employment has always been more informal, harder to track, and rife with illegal practices (child labor, illegal immigrants, minimum wage violations) that make reported data hard to trust/reason from.

grawprog• 7 years ago

Even here in Canada farm related employment is classed separately for a variety of things including taxes and employment insurance. I've never really thought much about it, but every employment related government form I've ever filled out is like that.

teclordphrack23• 7 years ago

Farm work much of the time is ephemeral. There is a small window for goods to be picked. There is a small window for the tractors to be up kept post or pre harvest/planting. And, as others have said it can be a paper money transaction business.

08-152• 7 years ago

I'm confused. The headline talks about women holding more than 50% of jobs. But the tagline underneath says females make up the largest share of the labor market! That ain't make no sense! In the current year, not all women have a vagina. I didn't think Bloomberg was transphobic, but now I know better.

Ohn06• 7 years ago

"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

08-152• 7 years ago

Ahem. The topic of equality of outcome is flamebait to begin with. (Why? Because of tiny details like "encouraging" hidden it between the neutral reporting.)

The question is real, though: are trans women counted as women? If not: transphobic. If yes: what do these numbers really tell us? And there's also "non-binary" and "prefer not to say". Making sense of statistics in the current year is f'ing difficult.

macmichael01• 7 years ago

So much for diversity and inclusivity. In colleges and universities we are all taught to site our sources but if you are Bloomberg you can just make up data points to push a political agenda. It would be nice if there was a data source to reference to understand how they arrived at their stats. But hey we're just supposed to believe in pretty graphs with no source as being truthful and representative or the facts. Not to mention treading at Hacker News so it must be true.

It's also important to remember that: "76% of all statics are made up including this one!"

Here's something else to ponder!! Where were all of the women over the last 10 years when we were building out all of this tech? We needed women software engineers!! I saw very low numbers in my 13+ years in the bay area. The only women in software engineering roles were here on VISA. Now that we have leadership roles and political narratives.... we all of the sudden have a huge turnout. But hey what do I know. 13 years in the bay area working at top tech companies. No credibility at all. Argue with me and tell me know I am clearly wrong!

alf-pogz• 7 years ago

A lot of talk about younger men, but what about middle-aged men leaving the workforce? If I don't get married and have children within the next 5 years, I'm out too since I can retire early.

nsonha• 7 years ago

women v machines

Women now make up the majority of the U.S. labor force

Related Stories