<p>Wow! Hitting below the belt! As I said, these statistics were about ten years old, but I think you'd be surprised if you looked up the actual numbers. With a PhD I certainly do earn less than those in blue collar professions who may or may not have finished high school.</p>
<p>My last non-academic job was as community editor for the sole crisis center in the county I lived in. I had all the credits for my PhD but hadn't yet written my dissertation. My salary was $13,000 a year. The women with masters degrees in counseling and MSW's earned the same.</p>
<p>Hey mythmom, j/k! I'm no economist, but have read many studies concerning economic disparities among the races and their causes, so naturally gender inequity is going to be an overlap. You of all people know that careers in non profits, social work, education, and other humanities like careers aren't going to be as financially lucrative as other college degrees. In some of those careers a masters or higher is required. As honorable as those careers may be, you don't choose them because you wan't to be rich, but because of more interpersonal reasons. Guess who is overwhelmingly represented in those careers? Bingo.</p>
<p>George Balanchine, founder and head of New York City ballet, had a response to a dancer who complained that a sanitation man made more than she did- "garbage stinks".
Made sense to him!</p>
<p>Yes, and that is part of the problem, which is a veiled expression of gender bias. A parking lot attendant earns more money than a day care center worker. Because of the greater value of a car than a child? Because of the greater skills involved in parking a car than caring for a child? Or because we feel more comfortable paying women paltry salaries than we feel comfortable paying men? (And those stupid women are willing to work for these salaries)</p>
<p>
[quote]
"I find it endlessly interesting that people don't seem to be overly concerned that boys are getting a boost at some of our better schools
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Probably because not only are boys beneficiaries of this practice, but girls benefit, too. I assume that most (but not all) girls prefer a college that is 50-50.</p>
<p>garland - Just pointing out that the teenage/college-age mother statistic I was referring to are not necessarily "unwed." Therefore, some may choose not to attend college because they have an employed spouse.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Or because we feel more comfortable paying women paltry salaries than we feel comfortable paying men?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Comparing apples and oranges again. If men who did the SAME job were paid more then you have more of an argument.
Comparing income of the sexes based on educational attainment alone has too many variables. I believe the disparities are less sigificant when you you make similar comparisons. Let's look at your methodologies to support your point of view.</p>
<p>There is a problem here mostly in the URM community. Apart from that there is just a social pattern that some typically male jobs like construction and computer tech don't require college degrees yet pay fairly decent wages. Stero-typically female jobs, such as secretary, often reguire a degree or at least favor one. In many respects people are just doing what makes sense for them-no crisis. It would be very interesting to know the a SAT scores disagregated by men and women at elite schools. My guess is that there is very little difference at the high end but that is just a guess. I bet LAC's have to lean into it to keep the genders balanced by favoring males and that engineering schools tend to favor women in admissions.</p>