Stats Can said:
Obv its a generalization but that's not how I thought about it. I think males look to fields where they can be wealthy and succesful (not neccesarily based on interest) and I think women care more about doing something they feel passionate about and less so about money. Of course this is just an opinion.
"sorry to respond in a somewhat hostile manner. I think i misinterpreted you because of your use of the word "girl" in the thread title. It's a fairly diminutive way to refer to adult women who have often gone through 10 years of post-secondary education.
i doubt you would post a thread titled, "how does it feel to be in a boy dominated profession?
anyway, that aside, i think the gender disparity in the field is something to consider and potentially address. Many individuals feel more comfortable with male therapists, but they are few and far between. Psychology was once a field dominated by men, but now it seems to have gone to the opposite extreme.
One possibility is that psychology is a science/social science that, because of the subject matter, wasn't as inaccessible to women as many other scientific fields. Maybe psychology is just the first frontier, and soon us women will have conquered all of the fields! (joking. That is definitely less than ideal.)
I was honestly trying to be cute with the "girl" andI doubt you would post a thread titled, "How does it feel to be in a boy dominated profession?
I def would post that.I wouldn't be surprised
I think I misinterpreted you because of your use of the word "girl" in the thread title. It's a fairly diminutive way to refer to adult women who have often gone through 10 years of post-secondary education.
I doubt you would post a thread titled, "How does it feel to be in a boy dominated profession?
(which still seem to hold a bit true up to a certain extend).
's and 's and 's and such, in order to accurately portray your sarcasm. 
Gotcha. Next time, maybe remember to insert plenty of
I dunno, there was a thick coat of it. I was LOLing when I read it
Oh, drat! You mean it wasn't serious?! ): I think this partly has to do with salary, as mentioned; there are obviously cultural factors at play. American culture seems to feel more comfortable/'feelings' have become more important/it's become a norm to talk about 'feelings' more-so than 30-40 years ago - partly thanks to new therapeutic techniques and the psych field itself. I'm pretty sure this has been written about somewhere ...
wistful anticipation, of course
eye-rolling does not seem appropriate in this situation.
Here's my immediate, knee-jerk hypothesis:
Sexism has appeared to morph over the decades, and while it still exists in its most overt, blatant forms in many ways, there is now at least some taboo against it in the dominant discourse ... kinda. With this shift, sexist attitudes and beliefs have had to become more sophisticated and subtle, but boy oh boy do they march on with vigor. One of the most insidious ways that sexism perpetuates is in the form of benevolent sexism, where women are seen as magical, nurturing, social creatures (who are also fundamentally weaker and must be protected). These attitudes strike me as being more prevalent now than the hamfisted, hostile sexism, but they are certainly still destructive. (If you ask me to provide support for this, fine, whatever, I'll cite my ****. But I wont do it until I'm called out for it. Because I'm lazy.)
I've encountered this problematic attitude over and over again. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it exists to varying degrees in the vast majority. I'm not sure why it surprised me to come across quite a few people in this field (men and women) who hold onto a belief (or at least a suspicion) that women are inherently more nurturing and emotional than men. This belief in such a fundamental, biological difference is unfounded until we can eliminate the overwhelming societal pressures for either gender to be a specific way.
With that yada yada'ing about systemic reinforcement of traditional gender roles, I think that psychology is one of the few scientific professions that women can enter into that does not appear to completely challenge society's predominant view of them. Because it's expected of women to nurture and be social creatures, it's become a relatively easier path for women to pursue in the scientific world (thanks to the struggle of many strong women before us). That being said, as wigflip pointed to, the actual power structures within the field are less convincing of a shift in traditional power dynamics. The gaps in these disparities appear to be shrinking, thankfully, but at a much slower rate than I would like!
Perhaps once we smash the patriarchy, males will be encouraged by society to embrace their nurturing/empathetic capacities, and thus look to pursue more careers in psychology. So! If you'd like to have more male companionship in the field, might I suggest you take this hammer and smash with me?
Here's my immediate, knee-jerk hypothesis:
Sexism has appeared to morph over the decades, and while it still exists in its most overt, blatant forms in many ways, there is now at least some taboo against it in the dominant discourse ... kinda. With this shift, sexist attitudes and beliefs have had to become more sophisticated and subtle, but boy oh boy do they march on with vigor. One of the most insidious ways that sexism perpetuates is in the form of benevolent sexism, where women are seen as magical, nurturing, social creatures (who are also fundamentally weaker and must be protected). These attitudes strike me as being more prevalent now than the hamfisted, hostile sexism, but they are certainly still destructive. (If you ask me to provide support for this, fine, whatever, I'll cite my ****. But I wont do it until I'm called out for it. Because I'm lazy.)
I've encountered this problematic attitude over and over again. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it exists to varying degrees in the vast majority. I'm not sure why it surprised me to come across quite a few people in this field (men and women) who hold onto a belief (or at least a suspicion) that women are inherently more nurturing and emotional than men. This belief in such a fundamental, biological difference is unfounded until we can eliminate the overwhelming societal pressures for either gender to be a specific way.
With that yada yada'ing about systemic reinforcement of traditional gender roles, I think that psychology is one of the few scientific professions that women can enter into that does not appear to completely challenge society's predominant view of them. Because it's expected of women to nurture and be social creatures, it's become a relatively easier path for women to pursue in the scientific world (thanks to the struggle of many strong women before us). That being said, as wigflip pointed to, the actual power structures within the field are less convincing of a shift in traditional power dynamics. The gaps in these disparities appear to be shrinking, thankfully, but at a much slower rate than I would like!
Perhaps once we smash the patriarchy, males will be encouraged by society to embrace their nurturing/empathetic capacities, and thus look to pursue more careers in psychology. So! If you'd like to have more male companionship in the field, might I suggest you take this hammer and smash with me?
.) It's been encouraging to see that there are quite a few people out there who are really looking much more into gender/racial/economic critiques, and investigating more systemic oppressive structures. I think it's of utmost importance for individual and societal mental health to take very serious, critical analysis of the way that power dynamics are distributed in society, in all of its nebulous facets. )I think this is a common misunderstanding of what feminism is/advocates for (but that could be that feminism is hardly a monolithic ideology). I agree that there needs to be a firm grounding in biology, but the simple fact is that we haven't been able to tease out those differences nearly well enough to claim that the many differences between genders is due to biology. Additionally, there is also very strong evidence that supports how powerful gender norms can be. The point then, is not to ignore biological differences (or differences in tendencies), but to be aware that we simply do not know enough about the origin of those differences; it would be imprudent for us to claim causality. Regardless of whether biology makes a larger percentage of boys versus girls more interested in science and tonka toys versus English and dolls, they should have equal opportunity to engage in those interests without being punished for violating their assigned gender norms.I think feminism can be no less oppressive and dangerous, if not more, than patriarchy. I think politics of identity need to have a firm grounding in biology. We are not animals but we do come from animals. Male dominance, observed often enough in animal kingdom, is not an aberration. Men are different from women, that's fact. We are not different because we were told to play with little toy soldiers while our sisters played with dolls. I am not saying that did not matter, it certainly did. But it was NOT the only factor that has made me different from my sister. As a matter of fact, I DID play with dolls as a kid, perhaps because I'm the only guy, raised mostly by my mom and older sister (stop right there! No analysis!
I think feminism can be no less oppressive and dangerous, if not more, than patriarchy. I think politics of identity need to have a firm grounding in biology. We are not animals but we do come from animals. Male dominance, observed often enough in animal kingdom, is not an aberration. Men are different from women, that's fact. We are not different because we were told to play with little toy soldiers while our sisters played with dolls. I am not saying that did not matter, it certainly did. But it was NOT the only factor that has made me different from my sister. As a matter of fact, I DID play with dolls as a kid, perhaps because I'm the only guy, raised mostly by my mom and older sister (stop right there! No analysis!
Throughout history, different groups of people have been deemed inferior, oppressed, abused and killed. It's horrible. And it continues to this very day. Women, especially in many countries in Asia, are treated like second-class citizens even now. But it happens elsewhere with other groups too, and with men too, to a lesser extent--but it does happen. But one does not fix the problem by denying the reality of how men and women function. Equality does not mean 50-50. It means treating each sex/gender, each individual, humanely, respectfully, and providing opportunities and an environment that allows the person to actualize his/her potential. Emasculating men and treating their tendency to dominate as something inherently negative, as some have done, is not the way to go.
Feminism is basically just the view that women are actually humans and not just sexual objects.
Feminism is basically just the view that women are actually humans and not just sexual objects.
But somebody who claimed to be a feminist (a PhD student I know) told me that is not so. That feminism is about women being free to define who they are and how they are to be treated. That if a girl wants to be treated as a sexual object, then that's feminism. If she wants to be seen as a CEO and not a woman, then that's feminism. From her perspective, feminism is about power, power to define her own identity and in her own words. She believes that if MEN are to decide that women are actually human and not sex objects, that's patriarchy. Women are anything and everything they themselves want to be and that nobody has the right to define that except those very women. She gave me a lecture because I had a negative view of prostitution but that she felt it was "empowering." Though I agree with a lot of what she had to say, as noted above, I still refuse to see prostitution as empowering. I personally think that only a small number of women make the choice to be used in that way. For many it's the default option, the last thing they have to offer, when they have no real options left. If someone still wants to see it as empowering, fine. But I won't look at it that way.
The field of psychology is not the only field in the world that is becoming male dominated, it is a trend that is being seen in a lot of disciplines, especially in health care. To fix this we need to address the problem that fewer men are now graduating and earning higher degrees. If we do not fix that, we will never fix the gender imbalance.
