actually says that this is "the first generation in which more women than men have college degrees" and that women outearn men in less than a quarter of American heterosexual couples. If gender inequality that favored men hadn't been the norm for so long, such modest advances for women wouldn't be news at all. (Kate Harding, “College gender gap levels off,” Salon, 26. January 2010)
Apparently it won't be worth a worry until enough women have entered college that they equal all those generations of men who've been given degrees, even though most of them are now dead, or getting there. Of the now, and of the subsequent future, how many women are getting degrees? and how many men? And why? Is it because college now favors those more weighted to do as they’re told? Who can please enough, stay within parameters enough, to ensure everything is steady-enough to carry them quietly but assuredly on through? Is it because girls actually experience a less traumatic upbringing than boys -- who are viewed as disobedient, and expected to take it -- and therefore are able to keep steady through the climb while guys fall this way and that? Is it "Gran Torino"? Or was that just part of the backlash of men who are uncomfortable when women prosper and grow?
According to Morris Dickstein's new book, "Dancing in the Dark," the depression was terrible for sex, 'cause most men felt emasculated as they saw their wives become the primary breadwinners. He doesn't go into it much, but he certainly doesn't suggest this was a good thing, a way for men to experience some of the inhibition of power women have historically felt, for instance.
Comments
Post a Comment