Thursday, December 4, 2008
The Ladies The He-Man Stimulus Plan?
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Randy Abelda has an interesting piece over at the Boston Globe, in which she argues that Obama's stimulus plan—which focuses overwhelmingly on creating "green-collar" jobs in construction, infrastructure building, and the auto industry—will disproportionately benefit men, who make up the vast majority of workers in those industries. Given that women make up a majority of the working poor, she argues, it would make more sense for Obama to also invest in industries where jobs are held predominately by women—like health care, child care, and education.
Yes, we need bridges, roads, and schools. And yes, we should invest in green jobs - stimulating the economy as well as building a strong basis for economic growth in the future. However, there is a crucial missing link in this package - both on the employment side and the investment side. That link is women. This might as well be called the macho stimulus package.
Jobs in construction and many of those that come with green investment often pay decent wages with benefits. But they are overwhelmingly held by men. Outside of trickle-around effects, this stimulus package will not create jobs for women in any close proportion to the numbers that will be unemployed. Almost one-quarter of families with children under the age of 18 are headed and supported by women as are the majority of single-adult households without children. This package will not put food on their plates. [...]
Caring for those who cannot care for themselves, healthcare, and primary education are the very foundation of a civil society. Investing in these outcomes are as vital to our long-term economic health as airports, highways, wind turbines, and energy-retrofitted buildings. On the employment side, women are disproportionately employed in these sectors, so any stimulus package directed toward them would boost the employment prospects of women at all levels of the wage scale.
Courtney at Feministing takes issue with Abelda's argument, noting that the reason women make up a majority of teachers, direct care providers , and secretaries isn't because they're naturally drawn to those fields, but because they've historically been pushed into them (and excluded from higher-paying jobs in construction and other male-dominated industries). "When my grandmother was growing up, she could be either a teacher or a nurse," she writes. "Although young women today rarely have the same kind of social conscription when it comes to their career choices, many are still socialized to believe that a caretaking role in the most virtuous and congruent with their gender." She suggests, smartly, that Obama should emphasize both traditionally male and female jobs, while supporting efforts to raise wages for "women's work" and encourage both men and women to move beyond traditional roles. "And further," she writes, "let's continue to support efforts like Men Teach and Nontraditional Employment for Women, that encourage both men and women to break out of traditional gender roles and follow their true calling."
Great idea, but first things first: Obama should propose a stimulus package for the economy we have, not the economy we want. To that end, Abelda's proposal—amend the stimulus package to address women-dominated industries like health care, education, and social work, as well as construction—would be a good first step.
Share via
1
Nice ideas, but before we support bucking the gender roles that keep men out of teaching, we'd better first address the hysteria, almost entirely from moms, that every man who teaches small children is a child molester waiting and wanting to happen. My husband spent a year teaching preschool, and while he enjoyed the work and thought the kids were great, faced a campaign of harassment from the mothers who didn't want any grown man unsupervised around their preciouses at any time. Their specious complaints, totally uninvestigated by the school, got him fired, and he wisely decided on another line of work. After that time, I became more informed on the case law involving parent hysteria in preschool and daycare, and I realize now that we dodged a bullet in him only getting fired. I wouldn't recommend teaching below high school age to any male friend of mine, no matter how talented they would be at it.
As for the stimulus package, it seems far more sensible to let the women come to the green infrastructure jobs that are being created, rather than making a package that reaches specifically out to them, rather than to their fields. There are already plans in the works for boosting both health care and education, including increasing the salaries for good teachers. We need infrastructure and jobs, so hurrah for a plan that provides both, period.
As for the stimulus package, it seems far more sensible to let the women come to the green infrastructure jobs that are being created, rather than making a package that reaches specifically out to them, rather than to their fields. There are already plans in the works for boosting both health care and education, including increasing the salaries for good teachers. We need infrastructure and jobs, so hurrah for a plan that provides both, period.
2
I think child care is an interesting area of investment. For most women with children, working just isn't worth the bother, because they'll barely earn enough to pay for child care -- if they're lucky, and don't earn less. For poor women, there's no contest.
3
My understanding is the idea for spending more money we don't have on stimulus programs is to get a double benefit: A short-term benefit of putting people to work immediately, and a long-term benefit of building up industries that may one day produce things that the rest of the world might want -- like non-polluting energy sources, for instance.
It's also probably not a coincidence that the focus of these programs -- construction and manufacturing -- represent sectors of the economy that have experienced the greatest job losses of late.
I'm not sure how second-guessing this by insisting that jobs be created in some other industry that employs more of a certain demographic serves the intended purpose here, which is to jump-start the Green Economy.
It's also probably not a coincidence that the focus of these programs -- construction and manufacturing -- represent sectors of the economy that have experienced the greatest job losses of late.
I'm not sure how second-guessing this by insisting that jobs be created in some other industry that employs more of a certain demographic serves the intended purpose here, which is to jump-start the Green Economy.
4
To my knowledge, there is neither an oversupply of teachers nor of nurses. I'm not certain I understand the reasoning behind spending the stimulus on traditionally female roles rather than making sure that women have access to jobs in areas that require subsidies, like green industry and construction.
5
I think the stimulus package is supposed to be like the new deal of the last century. Likewise, it focuses on construction and building up of infrastructures and visible works, rather than services which are not easily seen and often underappreciated.
I would like to point out that the infrastructure of this country is getting quite old, and much of it really needs at minimum inspection and at most, full-out replacement.
I think there's also a visual effect to the proposal--people want to see what their money is paying for. Teachers, nurses, and other service jobs that are traditionally women-dominated do not have the same visual impact that new bridges, roads, wind farms, etc have.
I would like to point out that the infrastructure of this country is getting quite old, and much of it really needs at minimum inspection and at most, full-out replacement.
I think there's also a visual effect to the proposal--people want to see what their money is paying for. Teachers, nurses, and other service jobs that are traditionally women-dominated do not have the same visual impact that new bridges, roads, wind farms, etc have.
6
#4: Good luck getting millions of women into construction or millions of men into nursing.
How about, you know, that universal health care and increased education funding that Obama promised long before he considered automaker bailouts and massive construction projects?
How about, you know, that universal health care and increased education funding that Obama promised long before he considered automaker bailouts and massive construction projects?
8
I'm sorry, maybe I missed something, but what is preventing women from pursuing these green-collar jobs? Why on earth is it a good idea to pour stimulus money into other sectors for no other reason than the fact that those sectors are *traditionally* woman-dominated? I say this as the fiance of a woman who is actively pursuing "non-traditional" employment.
9
@1
I'm sorry to hear about what happened to your husband... that's terrible. I hadn't even considered that but knowing the fear-mongering that routinely occurs in this country it shouldn't be surprising. What a bunch of idiot hysterical parents! Do they also insist on female-only coaches for their brats during those afterschool soccer practices? Female only bus drivers? Dumb dumb dumb!
I'm sorry to hear about what happened to your husband... that's terrible. I hadn't even considered that but knowing the fear-mongering that routinely occurs in this country it shouldn't be surprising. What a bunch of idiot hysterical parents! Do they also insist on female-only coaches for their brats during those afterschool soccer practices? Female only bus drivers? Dumb dumb dumb!
10
It's pretty well known that there is a shortage of qualified teachers in most states in the US (with a couple of exceptions) as well as a shortage of nurses/health care workers. There aren't a large number of people wanting for jobs in these fields... so... what would an investment in these areas look like?
I'm guessing that creating jobs (the proposed plan) is more important than paying currently in high demand positions more.
As a side note, the teacher/nurse thing was still in play even 40 years ago. When my mom was in high school in the mid-60s, her options were teacher, nurse, or flight attendant (until she got married).
I'm guessing that creating jobs (the proposed plan) is more important than paying currently in high demand positions more.
As a side note, the teacher/nurse thing was still in play even 40 years ago. When my mom was in high school in the mid-60s, her options were teacher, nurse, or flight attendant (until she got married).
11
Why don't we just pour money into womens' vaginae and be done with it? Would they stop bitching then? Or maybe, just maybe, they can use the opportunities that are available to everyone regardless of gender and get that engineering or chemistry degree?
12
Maybe women should, oh i don't know, consider working in the trades?
Women did it during WW II.
They did it during the 70s - why do you think Flashdance was so hot, it was when a lot of young women apprenticed in formerly male trades.
Heck, I remember how hard it was for women to break into the USWA back then.
Just reset your mind and realize "women's work" is whatever women do. And that ... can change.
Would you rather go back to the old Mad Men dichotomy of the Secretarial Pool versus the Executive split?
Women did it during WW II.
They did it during the 70s - why do you think Flashdance was so hot, it was when a lot of young women apprenticed in formerly male trades.
Heck, I remember how hard it was for women to break into the USWA back then.
Just reset your mind and realize "women's work" is whatever women do. And that ... can change.
Would you rather go back to the old Mad Men dichotomy of the Secretarial Pool versus the Executive split?
14
@1 & 9
What do you expect. That's the natural result of shit like this: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
What do you expect. That's the natural result of shit like this: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
15
Very interesting and important idea. But framed in too adversarial a way. Attempts to save the auto industry aren't about making sure men in particular get new jobs-- they're about not having hundreds of thousands or even millions of people join the unemployed. You could create a complimentary proposal to bail out American K-12 and higher education-- faced with catastrophic state government cuts around the country-- by saying that education is fundamental to creating a democratic society and a knowledge/ green economy. In fact Robert Reich argued just that recently:
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/12/…
You're right to be critical of gender discrimination in economic planning. But the arguments being used for state intervention in various industries right now aren't necessarily sexist, and can easily be extended to include people of all races and genders. That won't take place without a movement, though. Maybe you could look into what teachers unions, nurses unions, and homecare workers unions are up to?
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/12/…
You're right to be critical of gender discrimination in economic planning. But the arguments being used for state intervention in various industries right now aren't necessarily sexist, and can easily be extended to include people of all races and genders. That won't take place without a movement, though. Maybe you could look into what teachers unions, nurses unions, and homecare workers unions are up to?
16
Her argument seems to be along the line of Girls wear Pink and Boys wear Blue.
There is nothing preventing a chick from putting up a solar panel, or a dude from baby sitting some tots.
As far as the working poor, they would benefit most from getting cheaper automobiles...that is why I have propose Section 9 allowing them to buy new Fords using a portion of their income.
There is nothing preventing a chick from putting up a solar panel, or a dude from baby sitting some tots.
As far as the working poor, they would benefit most from getting cheaper automobiles...that is why I have propose Section 9 allowing them to buy new Fords using a portion of their income.
17
Come onnnn. Men, get a job teaching preschool or nursing or as a secretary and then you can whine a little about women not getting into highly-paid male-dominated professions at high rates. Even if you do have one of those jobs, the sexual harassment is nothing compared to the harassment most female construction workers and computer programmers and truck drivers receive. Do you guys seriously not understand why, for example, every cable/phone installer who has ever been to your house has been a man?
As #1 illustrates, there is quite a bit stopping men from getting child care jobs or women from getting construction jobs. Yes, we need to fix those social problems, but let's not punish people for choosing to avoid harassment and strong social pressures in the mean time.
As #1 illustrates, there is quite a bit stopping men from getting child care jobs or women from getting construction jobs. Yes, we need to fix those social problems, but let's not punish people for choosing to avoid harassment and strong social pressures in the mean time.
18
This sentence makes no sense.
Men, get a job teaching preschool or nursing or as a secretary and then you can whine a little about women not getting into highly-paid male-dominated professions at high rates.
This sentence makes no sense.
19
Women are big majorities in law school. And I'm sort of thinking that a lot of the changes coming down are going to keep the lawyers busy.
Medical school too; it's mostly women now. And you know, if more of our health care dollars get spent providing preventative care instead of last-minute interventions at the emergency room, well, that should be more work for doctors. And nurses too. Nurses are a major part of preventative care. Hopefully we'll see big layoffs in the insurance sector; at least I think they've got it coming.
Finally, won't more construction and manufacturing jobs help those guys catch up on their child support payments? You know who you are.
Medical school too; it's mostly women now. And you know, if more of our health care dollars get spent providing preventative care instead of last-minute interventions at the emergency room, well, that should be more work for doctors. And nurses too. Nurses are a major part of preventative care. Hopefully we'll see big layoffs in the insurance sector; at least I think they've got it coming.
Finally, won't more construction and manufacturing jobs help those guys catch up on their child support payments? You know who you are.
20
ECB,
"...focuses overwhelmingly on creating "green-collar" jobs..."
Note the focus: CREATING jobs.
Show me where there is a lack of jobs in health care or education... Every time I check, there is a shortage of teachers and nurses, (applicants) not jobs in those fields.
You might try thinking before linking...
"...focuses overwhelmingly on creating "green-collar" jobs..."
Note the focus: CREATING jobs.
Show me where there is a lack of jobs in health care or education... Every time I check, there is a shortage of teachers and nurses, (applicants) not jobs in those fields.
You might try thinking before linking...
21
If there are few women in construction of infrastructure, maybe rather than not building as much infrastructure we should figure out how to get more women in construction.
22
Good infrastructure, especially public transportation, is really important for women, especially poor women or women in families with only one car -- often, women simply are not physically able to GET to a decent-paying job, or have to rely on infrequent bus service or crappy cars that always need to be fixed.
(In developing countries, it's been shown that simply providing reliable public transport women can use without feeling physically threatened can make a huge difference in their ability to make money and have a better life.)
Child care is crucial to expand women's work options. A woman with a 3-year-old can't just show up for a plumbing apprenticeship with her toddler. Few trade schools will have child care available, or child care scholarships. (In urban areas, group care for a 3-year-old will start at $60/day, or $15/hour for a nanny.) Almost no trade work sites will have child care.
Women with school-age children have to pick them up at noon, or 2, or 3, depending on the age and day of the week. Very few construction sites are going to let workers leave before the day is over. School usually starts around 8, too, which means that mothers will not be able to get to work until 9 -- which is a couple of hours later than most trade jobs typically start.
A good solution would be to train women in the trades and help them get set up as self-employed, or to work with other women in a company. Women would probably do best in the trades if they worked separately from men. (and I know of several companies who do exactly this)
(In developing countries, it's been shown that simply providing reliable public transport women can use without feeling physically threatened can make a huge difference in their ability to make money and have a better life.)
Child care is crucial to expand women's work options. A woman with a 3-year-old can't just show up for a plumbing apprenticeship with her toddler. Few trade schools will have child care available, or child care scholarships. (In urban areas, group care for a 3-year-old will start at $60/day, or $15/hour for a nanny.) Almost no trade work sites will have child care.
Women with school-age children have to pick them up at noon, or 2, or 3, depending on the age and day of the week. Very few construction sites are going to let workers leave before the day is over. School usually starts around 8, too, which means that mothers will not be able to get to work until 9 -- which is a couple of hours later than most trade jobs typically start.
A good solution would be to train women in the trades and help them get set up as self-employed, or to work with other women in a company. Women would probably do best in the trades if they worked separately from men. (and I know of several companies who do exactly this)
24
One reason there is a shortage of nurses is that there are not enough slots for training them. Some programs have hundreds of applicants for less than a hundred slots. We are importing nurses from other countries, who could probably use the nurses themselves, because we don't have enough training slots.
Part of the reason for this is that nurses training is very labor intensive. You can't park 400 would-be nurses in a room and just lecture to them. You have to have small groups to teach them skills. Our colleges, in an effort to cut costs, have opted to cut slots for labor-intensive programs, and substituted programs where a TA can lecture to 400 students. After all, the nursing student pays the same tuition, but requires more FTEs from the teaching end.
So some of the stimulus could come in the form of opening up slots in nurse's training, probably by helping more nurses get the Master's they need to teach. This would be a good solution for our aging nursing corp, as most nurses are now over 40 year of age. I can tell you from experience that it gets harder and harder to spend all those hours on the floor. And who should be teaching our nurses but those with much experience. One of the problems in some programs is that the instructors are all academics who haven't been on the floor in many years. Or ever.
Filling jobs that exist, like teaching and nursing, could also be considered as "infrastructure". Build the bridges, but build the human services sector, too. With whatever gender.
Part of the reason for this is that nurses training is very labor intensive. You can't park 400 would-be nurses in a room and just lecture to them. You have to have small groups to teach them skills. Our colleges, in an effort to cut costs, have opted to cut slots for labor-intensive programs, and substituted programs where a TA can lecture to 400 students. After all, the nursing student pays the same tuition, but requires more FTEs from the teaching end.
So some of the stimulus could come in the form of opening up slots in nurse's training, probably by helping more nurses get the Master's they need to teach. This would be a good solution for our aging nursing corp, as most nurses are now over 40 year of age. I can tell you from experience that it gets harder and harder to spend all those hours on the floor. And who should be teaching our nurses but those with much experience. One of the problems in some programs is that the instructors are all academics who haven't been on the floor in many years. Or ever.
Filling jobs that exist, like teaching and nursing, could also be considered as "infrastructure". Build the bridges, but build the human services sector, too. With whatever gender.
25
Erica there are actually tons of women working in things like environmental science or urban planning, which are areas that will benefit from building a green economy. Go to any technical university, those are the majors that are split around 50-50 between male and female students.
26
Most of the nurses here in the home are from Africa or Asia. Of the thirty or so nurses here there are only 4 American born.
Most Commented on Slog
-
WTF? by Dan Savage
-
Your Wife Died Alone... by Dan Savage
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
-
Is Your Teen Out of Control... And Smoking Hot? by Dan Savage
-
PETA vs. Thanksgiving by Dan Savage
-
Health at Every Size by Dan Savage
-
The Cost (and Fear) of Dying by Anthony Hecht
-
The Democrats Have 60 Votes in the Senate for Health Care Reform by Jonathan Golob
-
Boy-Nerds Offended by Cootie-Ridden "Girl" Movie by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot For Twinks by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (26) RSS