[randomdata]

> If we take out of it the desire to find out why they're better educated (and ways we can balance it out), we're better off.

I would argue it is because female-dominated professions tend to have schooling requirements, by law. Male-dominated professions are less apt to.

Anecdotally speaking, I was able to start as a software developer, a male-dominated profession, when I was in high school and soon moved into doing it full time after that. As a result, I do not rank well when measured by my schooling. I later started farming and it did not require schooling either. Both jobs only required the desire to do them. In contrast, a female in my cohort interested in nursing, a female-dominated profession, would legally be prevented from doing so until completing many years of post-secondary schooling. And if that person wants to become a teacher, another female dominated career, later in life even more legal schooling requirements are necessary.

On the assumption that females have more schooling because they have to, in order to pursue the careers they want to do. Is the correction in easing the legal requirements for these jobs, or is the correction to enforce more stringent legal requirements on male-dominated jobs?

[UncleMeat]

> I would argue it is because female-dominated professions tend to have schooling requirements, by law. Male-dominated professions are less apt to.

And you would base this off what data? Surely we shouldnt just be using our guts here.

[randomdata]

> And you would base this off what data?

The data that shows that female-dominated professions are more apt to have legal requirements.

> Surely we shouldnt just be using our guts here.

Well, why not? We're not writing formal research papers here. Only writing comments for personal pleasure in our spare time.

[x220]

I think anyone, regardless of training or education, should be able to be a nurse. To say otherwise is sexism.