[ZGDUwpqEWpUZ]

IME the feminist argument seems to be that female-dominated industries are inherently unappealing and oppressive - i.e. that women are effectively forced into low-paid/underappreciated areas of work.

Quite how this squares with desperately redefining words to try to keep men out of those industries, and why men would want to enter them in the first place if they're such terrible jobs, I'm not sure.

They shouldn't need to play games like this if they actually believe what they claim. If anything, men working those jobs should be a benefit to women.

[Ourgon]

It is nonsense, e.g. veterinary sciences are heavily female-dominated. Academia is female-dominated except for the STEM fields but even those disciplines are starting to become so. Here in Sweden middle and higher local government is female-dominated. Meanwhile mining, off-shore and garbage collection are male-dominated, to name a few fields which could be termed 'unappealing'.

First-wave feminists had a point. Second-wave and third-wave feminists are just belligerent searchers-for-trouble who have done more harm than good.

[jleyank]

The pink-collar fields were horribly segregated (hence this name). Tech, for better or worse, eliminated most of them. Aside from, say, elementary education folks.