If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Quartz)   Women in tech fields make 11% more than brogrammers, smell 111% better   (qz.com) divider line 45
    More: Interesting, Jones AT&T Stadium, behavioural sciences, business sectors, academic major, American Association of University Women, average wage, nursing, salary  
•       •       •

1585 clicks; posted to Geek » on 03 Mar 2014 at 6:32 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-03 05:52:26 PM  
Did I miss that in the article? I didn't see 11% anywhere.
 
2014-03-03 06:03:43 PM  

gnosis301: Did I miss that in the article? I didn't see 11% anywhere.


Way at the bottom

Conflicting data from the BLS shows that some women who work full-time have a wagepremium, and earn 11% more than men
 
2014-03-03 06:13:55 PM  
FTA:  A recent study by the American Association of University Women titled "Graduating to a Pay Gap: The Earnings of Women and Men One Year after College Graduation" (pdf) examined data on approximately 15,000 graduates to estimate the effect of gender on wages.... According to the study, there are seven professions with pay equity (see below).
qzprod.files.wordpress.com

... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.
 
2014-03-03 06:16:51 PM  
"Our analysis shows that occupations like nursing; engineering; and math, computer, and physical science occupations are the best-paying jobs for women one year out of college," the authors Christianne Corbett and Catherine Hill report."These tend to be occupations that are well paying throughout a career as well."

And again, you go to that quote in the study and keep reading and the very next sentence says "Even though traditionally male jobs tend to pay more than traditionally female jobs do,  eliminating the pay gap is not simply a matter of encouraging women to pursue jobs in historically male fields, because there is a wage gap in nearly every field."
 
2014-03-03 06:29:32 PM  

Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.


I believe it you scroll down to page 29 you'll see what they mean. The earlier chart that shows the gap you mentioned is based on what they studied. The later chart shows the gap based on what occupations they actually ended up in.
 
2014-03-03 06:33:41 PM  

meyerkev: gnosis301: Did I miss that in the article? I didn't see 11% anywhere.

Way at the bottom

Conflicting data from the BLS shows that some women who work full-time have a wagepremium, and earn 11% more than men


And again, fact checking these people is an exercise in futility. FTA:  After adjusting for all the known factors, Corbett and Hill's model showed an "unexplained" 6.6% difference in wages between men and women who are full-time workers. Conflicting data from the BLS shows that some women who work full-time have a wagepremium, and earn 11% more than men.

The "conflicting" data is from this table, which lists hours of work on the left, and then number of male workers, median weekly earnings, standard error of median, and women's earnings as a percentage of men's:
35 or more hours................................................. 53,879 863 4 81.2
35 to 39 hours.................................................. 2,849 450 8 111.3
40 hours........................................................... 37,020 772 3 87.7
41 or more hours............................................. 14,010 1,238 8 85.5
41 to 44 hours.............................................. 701 928 24 87.4
45 to 48 hours.............................................. 3,443 1,104 15 87.8
49 to 59 hours.............................................. 6,391 1,312 21 87.3
60 or more hours.......................................... 3,476 1,380 19 85.0


And yes, right there in the 35-39 hour range - incidentally the range with the fewest number of members other than the 41-44 hour range - women make more.

But (i) this is a comparison of all women's income and all men's income, regardless of field, which is something the article spends half its time railing against; and (ii) the overall comparison still shows an 81% wage gap for all full-time workers. And not only are neither of those even hinted at by the article, the article cites that one 11% increase (in that 35-39 hour sub-range, across all industries) to "refute" the Corbett/Hill study's 6.6% difference  for the same industry, same hour numbers, same educational/occupational/demographic characteristics, and all other variables.

Basically, there doesn't seem to be even one statement in TFA that's not a misrepresentation or outright lie.
 
2014-03-03 06:34:55 PM  

itsdan: Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.

I believe it you scroll down to page 29 you'll see what they mean. The earlier chart that shows the gap you mentioned is based on what they studied. The later chart shows the gap based on what occupations they actually ended up in.


Page 29 is all about student loans. Did you mean something else?
 
2014-03-03 06:39:00 PM  

Theaetetus: itsdan: Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.

I believe it you scroll down to page 29 you'll see what they mean. The earlier chart that shows the gap you mentioned is based on what they studied. The later chart shows the gap based on what occupations they actually ended up in.

Page 29 is all about student loans. Did you mean something else?


Ah, found it... Page 17. Conceded. Still, they're batting 1/3 on a random spot check.
 
2014-03-03 06:45:07 PM  

Theaetetus: Theaetetus: itsdan: Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.

I believe it you scroll down to page 29 you'll see what they mean. The earlier chart that shows the gap you mentioned is based on what they studied. The later chart shows the gap based on what occupations they actually ended up in.

Page 29 is all about student loans. Did you mean something else?

Ah, found it... Page 17. Conceded. Still, they're batting 1/3 on a random spot check.


Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.
 
2014-03-03 06:46:50 PM  

Theaetetus: Theaetetus: itsdan: Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.

I believe it you scroll down to page 29 you'll see what they mean. The earlier chart that shows the gap you mentioned is based on what they studied. The later chart shows the gap based on what occupations they actually ended up in.

Page 29 is all about student loans. Did you mean something else?

Ah, found it... Page 17. Conceded. Still, they're batting 1/3 on a random spot check.


Sorry I meant 29 of the PDF, I see the document is numbered differently.

At least the article linked the PDF, I hate when they don't. So much of the 'debate' around the wage gap seems caused by people not realizing what specifically the statistic says, and just assuming it means whatever they think would be most relevant.
 
2014-03-03 06:52:22 PM  
I love it when people who aren't women or IT workers get all uppity about women in IT.
 
2014-03-03 06:58:38 PM  

meyerkev: Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.


Mind you, it's also not NEARLY the 0% that conservatives would have you believe. Every legitimate study seems to come down to a 6-10% wage gap, when all factors other than gender are controlled for.
 
2014-03-03 07:32:40 PM  
I love woman in IT/IS. Overall, I've found them to be detail orientated, accurate and honest. Their resumes aren't as padded and they aren't afraid to admit when they have hit their limits. I view these qualities as assets. I've never considered gender when determining compensation, I only consider skill and value.
 
2014-03-03 07:34:38 PM  

Theaetetus: meyerkev: Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.

Mind you, it's also not NEARLY the 0% that conservatives would have you believe. Every legitimate study seems to come down to a 6-10% wage gap, when all factors other than gender are controlled for.


If that's true--and I"m not saying it's not--then companies are stupid for not hiring mostly women.  They could be getting a 6-10% discount on the exact same quality work, but they don't realize it due to prejudice or whatever.
 
2014-03-03 07:45:56 PM  

nyseattitude: I love woman in IT/IS. Overall, I've found them to be detail orientated, accurate and honest.


So have I, but we all need to downplay the achievements of women in IT so that we can keep going with the mantra of victimhood and generate hostility among gender lines for self-serving purposes.
 
2014-03-03 07:54:26 PM  
But bro, I've put on all the Axe I can possibly spray on myself.  What else am I missing?
 
2014-03-03 07:58:01 PM  
Also, Fark, stop trying to make Brogrammer happen. It was like one clickbait article that used the expression.
 
2014-03-03 08:02:18 PM  
Could it be that government contracts are more likely to go to firms that have a minimum % of women in their technical staffs? The scarcity drives wages to the high side of the prevailing wages on such contracts.
 
2014-03-03 08:08:12 PM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Theaetetus: meyerkev: Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.

Mind you, it's also not NEARLY the 0% that conservatives would have you believe. Every legitimate study seems to come down to a 6-10% wage gap, when all factors other than gender are controlled for.

If that's true--and I"m not saying it's not--then companies are stupid for not hiring mostly women.  They could be getting a 6-10% discount on the exact same quality work, but they don't realize it due to prejudice or whatever.


The second Freakenomics book disproved the 23% discrepancy. They settled on a 8-10% difference that was 'unexplainable.' But most of the pay differences start to show up in middle-management and higher level jobs. Essentially the reason they don't hire more women for those positions to save money is glass-ceiling/old-boys-club/other-sexist-reasons related.
I'll try to remember to check that chapter when I get home.
 
2014-03-03 08:23:41 PM  
I never understand this approach or viewpoint where having an explanation means you don't have to do anything about it.  Sure, overall the wage gap is 20+% but we've explained a lot of that.  There's only 6% or so we still haven't explained, so see?  It's really not a problem!

We think your internal bleeding is caused by this big tumor you have in your stomach!  We still haven't explained why you got that runny nose last week, but that's hardly a problem.  We all get those from time to time!

A good portion of the "explanation" that we have are things like:
1. Women don't enter certain fields as much.  We also have evidence that certain fields don't interview women who give resumes as often as men with equally strong resumes, but this get's brushed over when you just call it "explained" and ignore.
2. Job benefits of higher paying professions don't match the lifetime requirements for women as well as they do for men.  This benefits bias, which includes things like comprehensive maternity leave or working around monthly cycles, forces women to work harder to achieve the same lifestyle as men.  Harder work is a selection process, as is the lack of the same family choices available to men.  Society, though, has a strong tendency to "explain" this simply as women wanting "different" life choices (like the family with children that the men also choose) and an expectation that businesses change to accommodate is rarely made.
3.  There is a certain amount of male-selection from male alpha activity.  It's the Richie Incognito factor applied to other workplaces.  Instead of accepting that sexual dimorphism and women's greater limbic system over neocortex may make it factually more difficult for women in general to ignore affronts and innuendo (and similarly, men's greater neocortex on average over limbic system make it much easier for them to ignore reality and hyperfocus on their worldview), it is common to simply brush this off as "women not able to take it in a man's workplace".  Another disparity "explained".

The list goes on.  An explanation is not a reason to stop looking for solutions.  Saying there is a 20+% wage gap is a factual statement.  Some of the reason for that may be non-problematic, but there is a distinct difference between explained and non-problematic, and it is the duty of researchers to be careful of that line.  This research here is lazy,
 
2014-03-03 08:32:43 PM  

spamdog: nyseattitude: I love woman in IT/IS. Overall, I've found them to be detail orientated, accurate and honest.

So have I, but we all need to downplay the achievements of women in IT so that we can keep going with the mantra of victimhood and generate hostility among gender lines for self-serving purposes.


"We"? I don't subscribe to that mantra.

I'll continue to recognize that equality and equal opportunity provides a superior platform, workforce, product and most importantly, a higher quality of life for everyone involved.
 
2014-03-03 09:08:35 PM  

Theaetetus: meyerkev: Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.

Mind you, it's also not NEARLY the 0% that conservatives would have you believe. Every legitimate study seems to come down to a 6-10% wage gap, when all factors other than gender are controlled for.


Citation Please
 
2014-03-03 09:34:39 PM  
Want to know a field that guarantees equal pay? THE farkING TRADES. I can only remember seeing one article suggesting that women should be looking there, and for some reason it focuses on the "trades" of hairstylist, chef, and... something else that pays crappy.

Yes, in Alberta, those are registered trades.
 
2014-03-03 09:57:13 PM  

Theaetetus: ... but then you follow their link to the pdf of the study and you find it says the exact opposite, with an 88% pay gap in engineering - $55k for men as shown in the above chart, but $48k for women.


Thats the difference between shiatty and good negotiating.

I had to teach my girlfriend to negotiate. She seriously didn't know how or think she was entitled to. She thought she had to accept the first offer given. I told her to counter with "well I'm making X now, and I really need X+10k to make things work for me given the commute etc."

She got 5k a year extra that she wouldn't have if she hadn't simply asked for more.
 
2014-03-03 10:13:23 PM  

nyseattitude: I love woman in IT/IS. Overall, I've found them to be detail orientated, accurate and honest. Their resumes aren't as padded and they aren't afraid to admit when they have hit their limits. I view these qualities as assets. I've never considered gender when determining compensation, I only consider skill and value.


Especially the ones with the low cut blouses and short skirts]
 
2014-03-03 10:26:22 PM  

spamdog: Also, Fark, stop trying to make Brogrammer happen. It was like one clickbait article that used the expression.


When I see Brogrammer, I think of somebody making a counterstrike level or some other frat douche thing.
 
2014-03-03 10:29:50 PM  

CujoQuarrel: Especially the ones with the low cut blouses and short skirts]


I've had no desire to nail any female IT employees.
#1: They didn't dress provocatively to begin with.
#2: Dipping the pen in company ink is stupid.
#3: They were all 30ish and married.
#4: They were good at what they did, and I respected the hell out of that. Anyone who can keep Lotus Notes running is a Deity.
#5: We were all FAR to busy doing actual work for socializing and romantic entanglements.
 
2014-03-03 10:35:32 PM  
Geez people, way to miss the point. What's important here is the question of why male programmers tend to smell on average worse than female programmers? I had a coworker who once his wife left for a month to visit her family back in their home country started to stink up the place. He'd been fine for years but once she left, it was like he didn't know how to use the washing machine... or the shower. I get that she was a stay at home mom and housewife so maybe the washing machine was foreign to him but knowing to shower shouldn't have been a surprise. The only women I've worked with who were smelly were elderly secretaries who alternated between smelling like mothballs and whatever perfume Avon was selling by the gallon.
 
2014-03-03 10:43:43 PM  
if (!tits){
exit (1);
}
 
2014-03-03 10:43:49 PM  

EngineerAU: Geez people, way to miss the point. What's important here is the question of why male programmers tend to smell on average worse than female programmers? I had a coworker who once his wife left for a month to visit her family back in their home country started to stink up the place. He'd been fine for years but once she left, it was like he didn't know how to use the washing machine... or the shower. I get that she was a stay at home mom and housewife so maybe the washing machine was foreign to him but knowing to shower shouldn't have been a surprise. The only women I've worked with who were smelly were elderly secretaries who alternated between smelling like mothballs and whatever perfume Avon was selling by the gallon.


Are you in Co or Wa by chance?
 
2014-03-03 10:54:44 PM  

nyseattitude: Are you in Co or Wa by chance?


Would Amsterdam count?

/Not in Amsterdam
 
2014-03-03 11:13:37 PM  

Lokasenna: Want to know a field that guarantees equal pay? THE farkING TRADES. I can only remember seeing one article suggesting that women should be looking there, and for some reason it focuses on the "trades" of hairstylist, chef, and... something else that pays crappy.

Yes, in Alberta, those are registered trades.


I'm a tradesman. At my current job there's zero tradeswomen. At my last there were none with my group and a very small amount of women mechanics in the other group. Maybe 1 out of 50. At the job before that there were none at the facility. I do't recall seeing any female contractors, either. At the job before that there was 1. And she was one who you learned not to mess with. Her daughter was an office worker. When guys learned who her mother was they stopped hitting on her to avoid the mother's (my co-worker) wrath. She was nice until you crossed her. But she was definitely of the "butch" type.

In the 4 places I've worked in the trades women were extremely rare. The women that I did see were not of the classically feminine type. The trades are a dirty, tiring place to be. Common knowledge says that women just don't want to get dirty. As wrong as common knowledge often is this bit seems to have at least some truth behind it.

I'm not saying that it's impossible to be a lipstick and evening gown feminine woman while in the trades, but most women who are don't seem to be attracted to that type of work.

I take care of myself and am clean cut in general and I work in the trades. I'm also willing to get dirty (although I do try to stay clean) and tired by the end of the shift. That combination seems to be uncommon. At least in my experience.

I'm a huge geek and thoroughly enjoy things like video games, cartoons, tech, etc. I also enjoy wrenching on things and working with my hands. I'm an instrumentation technician (think, specialized electrician) who specializes in industrial control systems in hazardous environments. I also try to actively look nice, or at least my opinion of nice.

You don't have to be a grease covered meathead to be in the trades. Those types do seem to be the majority, however.

I'm sure that I started this post with a clear point in mind but I seemed to have fallen into rambling out my thoughts. Meh.
 
2014-03-03 11:41:14 PM  

Witty_Retort: Yankees Team Gynecologist: Theaetetus: meyerkev: Yeah.  The Gap is THERE.  It's partly a function of position, hours, and pay v. benefits choices, and it's not NEARLY the 23% that the feminists would have you believe in terms of equal pay for equal work, but it's there.

Mind you, it's also not NEARLY the 0% that conservatives would have you believe. Every legitimate study seems to come down to a 6-10% wage gap, when all factors other than gender are controlled for.

If that's true--and I"m not saying it's not--then companies are stupid for not hiring mostly women.  They could be getting a 6-10% discount on the exact same quality work, but they don't realize it due to prejudice or whatever.

The second Freakenomics book disproved the 23% discrepancy. They settled on a 8-10% difference that was 'unexplainable.' But most of the pay differences start to show up in middle-management and higher level jobs. Essentially the reason they don't hire more women for those positions to save money is glass-ceiling/old-boys-club/other-sexist-reasons related.
I'll try to remember to check that chapter when I get home.


No Freakonomics book has ever "disproved" anything. Using those books to understand the world is like using South Park as a moral compass. Both cherry pick individual aspects of things that others have overlooked and then proceed to overlook the forest of other data that impacts reality.

It's fun McReading but never put them anywhere near the word "proof".
 
2014-03-03 11:59:33 PM  
I wish there were more women in the IT world. I basically miss speaking English some of the time.
 
2014-03-04 12:06:04 AM  
"Graduating to a Pay Gap: The Earnings of Women and Men One Year after College Graduation"

Based on people's excuses for why women make less, the existence of that pay gap is "explained" only after age 25 or so. The differences between how men/women handle things regarding work becomes more apparent once they grow up and/or have kids ... anyway, point being, I could easily see a smaller pay gap 1 year after college, and a much bigger one 10 years after college. Not saying I agree with it, just saying that's what I'd expect to see given the trends.
 
2014-03-04 12:09:00 AM  

HaywoodJablonski: I wish there were more women in the IT world. I basically miss speaking English some of the time.


You'll just end up speaking Cantonese, you know.
 
2014-03-04 12:32:58 AM  
Most women in that I know excel at a faster rate in mechanical engineering though they seem to be removed from the design side and are fast tracted into management more than their male counterparts

.02
 
2014-03-04 12:48:30 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: Common knowledge says that women just don't want to get dirty.


They do. They just need someone to take control and not let them chicken out of doing what they secretly want. Taking control lets them forget their own complicity in things, and allows them to get even dirtier than they'd imagine they want because they can tell themselves it's all for their partner even though they're loving it just as much or more if you know what you're doing.
 
2014-03-04 01:03:12 AM  

Fafai: Taking control lets them forget their own complicity in things, and allows them to get even dirtier than they'd imagine they want because they can tell themselves it's all for their partner even though they're loving it just as much or more if you know what you're doing.



You've just enlightened me about my sex life with my girlfriend. Thanks!
 
2014-03-04 02:15:00 AM  

Fafai: CtrlAltDestroy: Common knowledge says that women just don't want to get dirty.

They do. They just need someone to take control and not let them chicken out of doing what they secretly want. Taking control lets them forget their own complicity in things, and allows them to get even dirtier than they'd imagine they want because they can tell themselves it's all for their partner even though they're loving it just as much or more if you know what you're doing.


This man speaks the honest truth.
 
2014-03-04 06:09:17 AM  

NateAsbestos: Fafai: CtrlAltDestroy: Common knowledge says that women just don't want to get dirty.

They do. They just need someone to take control and not let them chicken out of doing what they secretly want. Taking control lets them forget their own complicity in things, and allows them to get even dirtier than they'd imagine they want because they can tell themselves it's all for their partner even though they're loving it just as much or more if you know what you're doing.

This man speaks the honest truth.


So all we need for a wonderful world is for either women to be honest or for a man to take over?
 
2014-03-04 08:53:06 AM  

Theaetetus: 35 or more hours................................................. 53,879 863 4 81.2
35 to 39 hours.................................................. 2,849 450 8 111.3
40 hours........................................................... 37,020 772 3 87.7
41 or more hours............................................. 14,010 1,238 8 85.5
41 to 44 hours.............................................. 701 928 24 87.4
45 to 48 hours.............................................. 3,443 1,104 15 87.8
49 to 59 hours.............................................. 6,391 1,312 21 87.3
60 or more hours.......................................... 3,476 1,380 19 85.0

And yes, right there in the 35-39 hour range - incidentally the range with the fewest number of members other than the 41-44 hour range - women make more.


Realize this is from yesterday but to clarify is the 2nd column the # of men or the # of people overall? You cited it as the number of men but then fewest members. If that column is just men in that group then it could also be that while the group has a small number of men it may contain a large representation of women. Odd they'd leave those numbers out of the chart.
 
2014-03-04 09:39:17 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: I'm not saying that it's impossible to be a lipstick and evening gown feminine woman while in the trades, but most women who are don't seem to be attracted to that type of work.


There are a few possible explanations for why there aren't women in certain contracting fields.

Vamco Sheet Metals, Inc. violated federal law by  serially firing female sheet metal workers

In addition to the primary safety and health hazards faced by all construction workers, there are safety and health issues specific to female construction workers. The small percentage of females within the construction trades and the serious health and safety problems unique to female construction workers have a circular effect. Safety and health problems in construction create barriers to women entering and remaining in this field. In turn, the small numbers of women workers on construction worksites foster an environment in which these safety and health problems arise or continue. . . .   The prevalence of a hostile workplace, restricted access to sanitary toilets, protective clothing and equipment in the wrong sizes, and poor on-the-job training-these were significant issues that adversely impacted women's ability to perform their jobs safely.
 
2014-03-04 09:41:27 AM  

Theaetetus: Basically, there doesn't seem to be even one statement in TFA that's not a misrepresentation or outright lie.


Thanks for wading through it so the rest of us don't have to.
 
2014-03-04 11:20:19 AM  

draypresct: There are a few possible explanations for why there aren't women in certain contracting fields.


Yeah, that's also a problem. The trades, as they stand today, are very much a "boy's club". High school never really ends. The trades are very much dominated by wanna-be macho meat heads. Not that said meat heads can't be acceptable at what they do.

Until that changes, then yeah, entry into such fields will be more difficult than necessary. I hated one of my old jobs. I couldn't stand the boy's club. I'm not the "dick swinging" type so I didn't fit in at all. They place was full of assholes.

Sometimes you need to want to be there more than they don't want you to be there. Or, do what I did and find a place that doesn't give a shiat what you're like and will accept you anyway. At my current place the lady who sits across from my cubicle, where my computer is when I'm not wrenching out in the field, is a chemist. There are two buildings. The building which houses all of the engineers and one particular project and the other building which houses all the rest of the reactors and where most of the actual work occurs. She's technically part of the engineering group. But she keeps her desk on the other building instead of with the rest of the engineers because she likes it better over here with the operators and us in maintenance.

There are plenty of bad work places for various reasons. The trades can be misogynistic at times. I wont deny that. If a woman really wants to enter the trades there are places that wont be against her. It's unfortunate that one may have to actually seek out a place like that because of a pattern of prejudices, however.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report